OpenAI reports uniqueness in the smooth isotropic elasticity inverse problem

On any bounded connected smooth domain in three-dimensional Euclidean space, equality of full static displacement-to-traction maps for two smooth real Lamé-modulus pairs with μ>0 and 3λ+2μ>0 on the closure forces both moduli to agree throughout the domain.

Sources for this record

What was already known

Earlier work recovered boundary Taylor data, while a prior global uniqueness claim was corrected. The smooth three-dimensional isotropic elastic Calderón problem under these positivity assumptions remained open.

AI involvement AI-led

OpenAI credits itself as manuscript author and states that its internal frontier model produced the results in this release. Individual human input is not detailed enough to establish task-only autonomy.

OpenAI is named as author on the manuscript, and its release attributes the results to an internal frontier model. The individual human input is not detailed enough to establish autonomy.

Importance Major

Resolves global uniqueness for two smooth three-dimensional isotropic elastic moduli from full zero-frequency boundary data.

Limitations

The result uses the full boundary map in fixed Euclidean coordinates and proves uniqueness, not a reconstruction algorithm.

Technical verification Formal (Lean 4)

OpenAI reports a Lean proof matching the selected claim.

Formal checking

The pinned Lean note proves global uniqueness for the two Lamé moduli under the stated smoothness and positivity assumptions.

Checker
OpenAI-reported Lean 4 / Comparator
Scope
On any bounded connected smooth domain in three-dimensional Euclidean space, equality of full static displacement-to-traction maps for two smooth real Lamé-modulus pairs with μ>0 and 3λ+2μ>0 on the closure forces both moduli to agree throughout the domain.
Basis
Reported by the linked checker
Evidence source

Checking a formal statement does not establish that it matches the original problem.

Human understanding Few

Few is the default when evidence for a higher level is insufficient. No named person is documented as explaining the central argument for this assessed contribution.

Correction and publication history

2026-10-18 · publication

Primary manuscript, attribution, prior-work, and scoped checking review for non-notifying local inclusion.

Read this published revision