For a linear equation E and an integer k ≥ 1, the k-colour Rado number R_k(E) is the least n such that every k-colouring of {1, ..., n} contains a monochromatic solution of E. Using SAT solving we determine two cells that were empty in the table of four-colour values of Chang, De Loera and Wesley (ISSAC 2022): R_4(4(x−y)=3z) = 313 and R_4(5(x−y)=2z) = 625 = 5^4. The second is the first case with b ≥ 2 in which the four-colour number of a(x−y)=bz (a ≥ b+2, gcd(a,b) = 1) equals the general lower bound a^4, in analogy with their three-colour theorem R_3(a(x−y)=bz) = a^3. We also confirm R_4(2(x−y)=3z) = 226, listed as "> 225" in that table and recently announced in an unrefereed preprint by T. Ichikawa, and we recompute R_4(3(x−y)=2z) = 103 and R_4(x+y+c=z) for 1 ≤ c ≤ 12, in agreement with the literature. Every lower bound is certified by an explicit colouring checked by an independent brute-force program. Every upper bound is an unsatisfiability claim whose LRAT proofs, produced by CaDiCaL 2.1.3, are checked by the formally verified checker cake_lpr; for the largest instances we use cube-and-conquer, with the completeness of the cube split itself checked by cake_lpr. For 226, 313 and 625 the upper bounds were in addition verified for formulas without any symmetry-breaking clauses. Files: rado4.pdf is the note (9 pages). rado4_data.zip contains the colourings and an independent checker, the CNF generator, the formulas for a(x−y)=bz with SHA-256 checksums of all formulas, the cube files, the cube-and-conquer driver and the per-check logs of all cake_lpr runs. The LRAT proofs are not included because of their size. Not peer reviewed. The search code, the computations and a first draft of the note were produced with the help of an AI assistant (Claude, Anthropic). The author is responsible for the content.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuichi Murakami (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: