Plectis Atlas
Search

↑ and ↓ move, Enter opens, Esc closes.

Show on the map

Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture

OpenAI groups related papers into a “family”. OpenAI’s catalogue describes this one:

Proves Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture: every nonempty finite oriented graph has a vertex with at least as many vertices at directed distance exactly two as at directed distance one. Oriented graphs may be arbitrary apart from the exclusion of loops and oppositely directed edge pairs. (OpenAI’s Lean note)

Lean is a language for mathematical statements and proofs that a computer can verify. The assessments below ask whether those statements express the result OpenAI describes here.

Both independent assessments find that the Lean statements express or imply the whole result described above. Read the assessments

Reported proof verification
One Lean statement in the release; three independent groups report that Comparator accepted runs for this file at the version shown here.

Papers

Each paper opens as a reading page in the browser, with the PDF beside it. The statements each paper opens with are on its reading page.

One Lean statement in this family

Lean is a language for mathematical statements and proofs that a computer can verify. The Lean statement below is shown beside its possible paper counterpart, with the reason they were linked.

For a configured theorem, the Comparator program tests whether OpenAI’s separate proof proves the exact Lean statement using only the allowed axioms. Some statement files instead configure definitions for comparison by name and type. Acceptance does not establish that a formal statement means the same thing as the paper’s theorem.

SeymourSecondNeighborhood

The paper states

The words they share: finite, graph, nonempty, oriented, vertex.

Possible Lean counterpart

Selected from shared wording. No review of whether the statements mean the same thing is recorded.

Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture

SeymourSecondNeighborhood.lean, the release lists it as a main result.

theorem exists_goodVertex (r : V → V → Prop) (hr : IsOriented r) :    ∃ v, GoodVertex r v := by  sorry

This file states the theorem with sorry, a placeholder, in place of its proof. OpenAI supplies a separate proof file. Comparator tests whether that proof proves the statement here.

three independent groups report that Comparator accepted runs for this Lean statement file: cert-machine; MathVet; Neal McBurnett, openai-math-lean-tooling. Who ran the proof-verification program

  • cert-machine records it as “CERTIFIED”.
  • MathVet records it as “comparator-sandboxed-pass”.
  • Neal McBurnett, openai-math-lean-tooling records it as “accepted”.

Read the complete Lean statement

Other mathematical statements in OpenAI’s Lean library

Atlas found these propositions by scanning the text of the project’s Model.lean file. Each name links to its definition, with any associated statement file beside it. This list does not record running Lean to interpret or verify those definitions.

Independent comparisons and proof-verification reports

Does the Lean express the advertised result?

MathVet and cert-machine agree on how much of the advertised result the Lean statements express.

MathVet and Carlos Toledo’s cert-machine independently assessed whether this family’s Lean statements express the whole result OpenAI describes in its catalogue. These are assessments of the family as a whole, not of each paper theorem separately.

MathVet finds that the Lean statements express or imply the whole advertised result (their term: “full”).

Their note: exists_goodVertex (r) (hr : IsOriented r) : ∃ v, GoodVertex r v over a nonempty Fintype V, with GoodVertex r v := (firstNeighbors r v).card ≤ (secondNeighbors r v).card and second neighbors {w | w ≠ v ∧ ¬ r v w ∧ ∃ u, r v u ∧ r u w} (directed distance exactly two); IsOriented = loopless + asymmetric. Exactly Seymour’s conjecture.

“full”, in their words: The challenge statements imply the headline claim after unpacking definitions or one routine step.

Their method: An independent, model-assisted, pre-referee reading of each family’s challenge statements against its headline claim under a published rubric (PROTOCOL.md), with its own Comparator runs per challenge.

cert-machine finds that the Lean statements express or imply the whole advertised result (their term: “MATCHES”).

“MATCHES”, in their words: The challenge statements state the headline as OpenAI wrote it.

Their method: Every Comparator challenge re-run on Linux with nanoda switched on, decided by a preregistered rule.

OpenAI’s own note on what its Lean covers

Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture asserts that every nonempty finite oriented graph has a vertex with at least as many second out-neighbors as first out-neighbors. The formalized result proves this assertion, where the second neighborhood consists of vertices at directed distance exactly two. The initial vertex and first neighbors are excluded from that count, and sinks are included.

AI-drafted comparisons, with no recorded human review

  • Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture SeymourSecondNeighborhood

    Unreviewed AI draft: states a paper’s theorem as the paper does. States the main theorem: every nonempty finite oriented graph has a vertex with at least as many second out-neighbours as first out-neighbours.

Who ran the proof-verification program?

These groups report running Comparator with the release’s Lean statement files. For a configured theorem, it verifies OpenAI’s separate proof against the exact statement; some files instead configure definitions for comparison by name and type. Each row is the named group’s report. Atlas has not repeated the runs.

These reports do not list the software versions, proof-verification programs, axioms, time or memory in separate fields. Any such details in a report’s prose are reproduced below.

Seymour’s second-neighborhood conjecture SeymourSecondNeighborhood

Three reports, all at the release’s recorded version.

Reported byTheir wordTheir accountDateOriginal report
cert-machine“CERTIFIED”Re-run through Comparator with the independent nanoda kernel switched on: Lean’s kernel and nanoda both accept OpenAI’s solution.10 October 2026Original report
MathVet“comparator-sandboxed-pass”Re-run through Comparator in a sandboxed virtual machine: accepted.8 October 2026Original report
Neal McBurnett, openai-math-lean-tooling“accepted”Re-run through Comparator with Lean’s kernel: accepted (the check took 123 s; peak memory 2.3 GiB).11 October 2026Original report

Other reports of proof verification

Other people’s accounts of running proof-verification software, with links to their reports.

  • Robert Joseph George, Do the Lean statements in openai/math match their papers?, 7 October 2026. Source

    The review reports that Comparator accepted OpenAI’s solution for this challenge, run end to end on Lean 4.34.1 with the default kernel and only the three standard axioms.

What these papers cite in the release, and what cites them

These links come from the papers’ bibliographies. A citation records that one paper cites another; how each cited result is used has not been examined here.

Papers elsewhere in the release that this family’s papers cite

This family’s papers cite no paper elsewhere in the release.

Papers elsewhere in the release that cite this family’s papers

No paper elsewhere in the release cites this family’s papers.

References outside the release

Each paper’s outside references are listed with it on its reading page, where each citation is placed. Every outside work cited in the release: References outside the release

Explain a result, compare statements or propose a correction

Atlas has no contributed explanation for this family yet. You can offer one with a GitHub account. You receive named credit and disclose any AI assistance.

Each button opens a GitHub form with this page and its source version filled in. Opening the form does not reserve the work.

Offer to write an explanationCompare the Lean statement with the paperSuggest a source attributionSuggest a change

What people have said

Commentary on this family by others, dated and credited. It is commentary, not a finding.

  • An unsigned public tier list, the OpenAI Math Tier List, classes it as a proof and rates its significance, if it holds up, as “Career-defining publication”. The page says that nothing on it is verified.

    Author not stated. Source

Questions awaiting review

Each item identifies a statement, definition or report that needs further review. Its link opens a GitHub form with the source version already recorded.

Read the Lean statement against the paper

  • An AI agent drafted an assessment of which part of the paper this Lean statement expresses. No named human review is recorded. Open the form

Identify the theorem the catalogue describes

  • Family 173 The theorem shown was selected from shared wording with OpenAI’s description. Atlas records no review confirming that it is the theorem the description means. Open the form

Compare the proposed paper and Lean matches

  • Family 173 Atlas records no review of whether each linked Lean statement and paper theorem mean the same thing. Open the form