Bound · version 2

Proposed result: Λ ≤ 0.1787854

Statement

The candidate claims Λ ≤ 893927/5000000 = 0.1787854 using X = 6000000185827, t₀ = 129/800 and y₀² = 87677/2500000 in the Polymath15 criterion.

Assumptions

  • Classical heat-flow normalization.
  • Uses published finite RH verification below the barrier, the Polymath15 criterion and the candidate interval certificate package.
  • No global RH assumption is claimed; certificate correctness and theorem-to-code alignment are unassessed here.

Scope

A source-reported candidate improvement over the selected published 0.2 baseline.

This source presents a theorem with a proposed proof. Its wording does not establish acceptance or independent mathematical review.

Explanation

In Riemann hypothesis · publication v12

Bounds & computations · 1

Compare the quantity and hypotheses within each group. A finite check, conditional theorem and proposed improvement cover different scopes.

Classical Newman constant Λ
ResultValueConditions
Proposed result: Λ ≤ 0.1787854 →

Proposed

Result date not recorded

≤ 0.1787854Proposed refinement with X = 6000000185827, t₀ = 129/800 and y₀² = 87677/2500000.

In Riemann hypothesis · publication v13

Bounds & computations · 1

Compare the quantity and hypotheses within each group. A finite check, conditional theorem and proposed improvement cover different scopes.

Classical Newman constant Λ
ResultValueConditions
Proposed result: Λ ≤ 0.1787854 →

Proposed

Result date not recorded

≤ 0.1787854Proposed refinement with X = 6000000185827, t₀ = 129/800 and y₀² = 87677/2500000.

Evidence

Source reports

Connections

In this problem · publication v12 · Selected context

Riemann hypothesis →

Bound · Proposed

Even a valid positive upper bound would leave Λ = 0 open. This candidate is not counted as established progress or used to replace the published baseline.

Relationship not independently reviewed. This concerns its use in this problem.

In this problem · publication v13

Riemann hypothesis →

Bound · Proposed

Even a valid positive upper bound would leave Λ = 0 open. This candidate is not counted as established progress or used to replace the published baseline.

Relationship not independently reviewed. This concerns its use in this problem.

Sources

Gomila · proposed improved Newman bound →

Jude Gomila · Project documentation

Public candidate audit package, not yet peer reviewed. The author reports interval certificates; AI referee checks do not establish independent human mathematical acceptance.

Revision & attribution

Source revision: git-a74738deb6d5e0f76887cb36901da08b68dca705. Observed Oct 10, 2026.

The author discloses human–AI collaboration using Claude and ChatGPT/Codex. Model versions are not established by this curation; the attributed author and operator are separate from AI companies.

Interval certificates and replay package: a74738deb6d5e0f76887cb36901da08b68dca705. Read-only artifact links; OpenMath has not run the verifier or replayed the interval certificates.

History

Statement versions

Statement versions and problem publication versions are separate. A new publication can update context or sources while retaining the same statement.

Assessment history · 1

Assessments retained in these publication records. Earlier statement versions retain their own source histories.

Record details
Claim ID
claim-rh-proposed-newman-improvement
Statement version
2
SHA-256
a52d006fd309301063983a189df652a3bfeabfee61533ba26979a72bc455c8d7

Publication records