Disapproves twelve source-validity propositions in machine-assisted discovery, indicating foundational discrepancies.
Twelve Closed SFT Source-Validity Disproofs of OpenAI's 2026 Mathematical Artifacts. This paper freezes twelve principal Lean declarations associated with OpenAI's ten advertised advances and asks whether each exact submitted artifact is a valid derivation inside the already admitted Smithian Fold Theory (SFT) model. Under the pre-existing SFT admission law, all twelve exact source-artifact validity propositions are disproved; all ten advertised bundles are invalid as submitted SFT results; twelve SFT-native reconstructions remain separately proved; and no native-to-source validity transfer exists. The release includes the paper, a companion essay on human credit in machine-assisted discovery, complete proof-chain evidence, corrected compatibility and completeness audits, implementation-distinct verification, Lean 4 source and reports, model-admission receipts, and checksums. The closed audit records 3,072 enumerated routes and decisions, 120 proof steps, 60 executable checks, 48 controls, zero open chains, and a whole-model Lean PASS over 2,777 admitted claims across seventeen branches. The result distinguishes conditional formal verification under imported foundations from foundational derivation under SFT's registered zero-axiom and zero-free-parameter constraints. It does not assert redistribution rights over OpenAI's captured manuscript PDFs, which are excluded from this deposit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maria Smith (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: