What was already known
Existence was known; uniqueness had been established only for equal, symmetric or restricted mass families.
AI involvement
Tomar credits generative AI tools with finding and proving results and writing interval and Lean code. He explains the Hessian majorant, interval bound and covering argument.
The paper attributes discovery and proof of the results to generative AI tools, enough for central AI work but insufficient for model-specific autonomy.
- Supporting source (palomar-registry.org) — v2 registry summary, 4 October 2026
Importance
Answers the all-positive-masses uniqueness question and establishes uniform nondegeneracy.
Limitations
The Q≥K/4 bound belongs to the later formalization; v1 had the weaker Q≥K/128. The public disclosure does not identify one model’s exact mathematical idea.
Technical verification
The paper and v2 registry report complete Lean formalization of A and B; v1 had only a weaker Q≥K/128 bound, so this assessment is tied to v2 and the later repository.
Independent checking
formal proof and 7,307 kernel-checked interval certificate theorems
- Checker
- Lean 4 kernel and Palomar Comparator
- Scope
- Theorems A and B, including Q≥K/4 for every positive-mass convex configuration
- Basis
- Reported by the linked checker
Human understanding
Tomar explains the Dziobek identity, mass-free 2×2 majorant, interval bound and covering argument in §§1.4, 3, 5 and 6.
Correction and publication history
Answers the all-positive-masses uniqueness question and establishes uniform nondegeneracy.
Read this published revision