Lean statement

Ostmann’s inverse Goldbach theorem and the infinite-summands case

Lean is a language for mathematical statements and proofs that a computer can verify. This page shows one statement file from OpenAI’s release, possible paper matches and independent reports. The code-like names below identify the definitions or theorems selected by the proof-verification settings.

Ostmann's inverse Goldbach theorem and the infinite-summands case

Theorems selected for verification: OAI.Ostmann.inverseGoldbach OAI.Ostmann.twoInfiniteSummandsImpossible

Lean statement file: OstmannComplete.leanShow on the mapOpenAI’s Lean catalogue does not list this as a main result; the release’s Lean notes for family 013 link it.

See the candidate theorem Who ran the proof-verification program Report a comparison with the paper (GitHub issue)

The Lean statement

The lines of the Lean statement that state the theorem, then the definitions in the file that it uses.

def TwoInfiniteSummandsImpossible : Prop :=  ∀ A B : Set ℕ, A.Infinite → B.Infinite → ¬ EventuallyPrimeSumset A B⋮def InverseGoldbach : Prop :=  ∀ A B : Set ℕ, A.Nontrivial → B.Nontrivial →    Set.Infinite (@symmDiff (Set ℕ)      (@SemilatticeSup.toMax (Set ℕ)        (@Lattice.toSemilatticeSup (Set ℕ)          (@CompleteLattice.toLattice (Set ℕ)            (@CompleteBooleanAlgebra.toCompleteLattice (Set ℕ)              (@CompleteAtomicBooleanAlgebra.toCompleteBooleanAlgebra (Set ℕ)                (@Set.instCompleteAtomicBooleanAlgebra ℕ))))))      Set.instSDiff (sumset A B) primes)⋮theorem inverseGoldbach : InverseGoldbach := by  sorry⋮theorem twoInfiniteSummandsImpossible : TwoInfiniteSummandsImpossible := by  sorry

A Lean statement states the theorem and leaves its proof as sorry on purpose. OpenAI’s proof is in a separate solution module, and a program called Comparator checks that proof against this statement.

Definitions needed to read it

Local definitions the statement names, followed through the definitions they name in turn. The match is by name in the source text, so a name reached only through notation can be missed; the full file is below.

definition OAI.Ostmann.primes line 9

def primes : Set ℕ := {n | Nat.Prime n}

abbreviation OAI.Ostmann.sumset line 11

abbrev sumset (A B : Set ℕ) : Set ℕ := A + B

definition OAI.Ostmann.EventuallyPrimeSumset line 13

def EventuallyPrimeSumset (A B : Set ℕ) : Prop :=  ∃ N : ℕ, ∀ n, N ≤ n → (n ∈ sumset A B ↔ n.Prime)

Possible paper match, with no recorded review

Atlas selected this possible match by comparing words in the Lean statement with every statement in the family. No review of whether the statements mean the same thing is recorded.

Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: summands, infinite and two. Found in the paper’s title, which its main theorem states: primes.

Theorem 2.3 of The additive indecomposability of the primes

Theorem (Two infinite summands)

There do not exist two infinite sets A,B\subseteq\N_0 such that (A+B)\mathbin{\triangle}\mathcal P is finite.

Section 2, Finite summands and residue supports Read it in the paper TeX source, line 113

Show the TeX

There do not exist two infinite sets $A,B\subseteq\N_0$ such that
$(A+B)\mathbin{\triangle}\mathcal P$ is finite.

Other possible paper matches, closest wording first

Theorem 1.1 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: infinite and two. Found in the paper’s title, which its main theorem states: primes. Shared only with the release’s name for the Lean statement or OpenAI’s note on it: ostmanns.
Proposition 3.1 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: max and primes.
Corollary 4.2 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: max and primes.
Proposition 7.1 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: two.
Corollary 3.2 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: max.
Proposition 4.1 of The additive indecomposability of the primes. Words of the Lean statement, its names split into words, that also appear in the theorem: max.

How Atlas selects possible matches: it compares words in the Lean statement with every statement in the family. It also splits Lean names into words. The release’s label and note receive less weight; a main theorem wins a close match. If the Lean wording yields no clear match, Atlas uses the catalogue description. This selects passages to compare; it does not establish that they mean the same thing.

Reported Comparator runs

two independent groups report that Comparator accepted runs for this Lean statement file: Carlos Toledo’s cert-machine; Neal McBurnett’s openai-math-lean-tooling. Each group reports its own Comparator run for this statement file. Atlas has not repeated the runs.

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

Carlos Toledo’s cert-machine

How they ran it, in their words

Every Comparator challenge re-run on Linux with nanoda switched on, decided by a preregistered rule; every family’s challenge statements read against OpenAI’s headline, clause by clause. Decider: Comparator (leanprover/comparator d03acab1 = tag v4.34.0, built with the release’s toolchain v4.34.1), lean4export 076e8e57, landrun 811cfff5, nanoda_lib 3a240721 — on GitHub’s Linux runners (.github/workflows/openai-math-kernel.yml), one j…

Accepted Their term: “CERTIFIED”.
Re-run through Comparator with the independent nanoda kernel switched on: Lean’s kernel and nanoda both accept OpenAI’s solution.
Reported 10 October 2026, at the release version shown here. Original verification report

Neal McBurnett’s openai-math-lean-tooling

How they ran it, in their words

Each challenge’s solution is built and checked by Comparator at the pinned release, on Lean leanprover/lean4:v4.34.1, recording the verdict, the check time and the peak memory; the run was still in progress at this snapshot (192 accepted, 224 pending).

Accepted Their term: “accepted”.
Re-run through Comparator with Lean’s kernel: accepted (the check took 307 s; peak memory 7.6 GiB).
Reported 10 October 2026, at the release version shown here. Original verification report

What an accepted Comparator run would establish

If Comparator is run under this configuration and accepts, the solution proves the configured theorem using only the allowed axioms, and the Lean kernel accepts every step.

This configuration lists no definition holes, so every definition the statement uses is compared as it is written in this file.

Allowed axioms: propext, Quot.sound, Classical.choice

Acceptance leaves open whether the Lean statement means the same thing as the paper’s theorem, whether the paper’s other claims are correct, and whether the result is new. Those questions require comparing the definitions and statements, reviewing the paper’s arguments, and reading the earlier literature.

Do family 013’s Lean statements express the advertised result?

These assessments compare all the family’s Lean statements with the whole result OpenAI describes in its catalogue. They do not assess this statement alone. Each group uses its own published rules.

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

MathVet
Finds the whole advertised result stated or implied Their term: “full”.
The challenge statements imply the headline claim after unpacking definitions or one routine step. Their record
Their note: None; standard Mathlib objects only.
Carlos Toledo’s cert-machine
Finds the whole advertised result stated or implied Their term: “MATCHES”.
The challenge statements state the headline as OpenAI wrote it. Their record

Read the complete assessments on the family page.

OpenAI’s own note on what this Lean statement covers

“The linked statements include the full result and its two-infinite-summands case.”
Quoted from OpenAI’s Lean note for this family

An AI agent drafted an interpretation of that note, classifying this statement as “states a paper’s theorem as the paper does”. No human review of the draft is recorded.

Supporting material

The complete Lean statement file

38 lines, copied from release version fd4aeeb. A name defined in this file links to its line; pointing at the name shows its definition.

Declared in this fileOpenAI’s library at fd4aeebOther linked names open the current documentation for Mathlib, Lean’s mathematical library.

Links in the file: 6 to its own declarations, 22 to Mathlib’s documentation. 7 declared names also link to the same declaration in OpenAI’s library. OpenAI uses Mathlib version d13f23b. The linked documentation describes the current version, so names that have since changed may be missing there.

Definitions and lemmas named by the statement

If Comparator accepts a proof, it proves inverseGoldbach exactly as written here. To compare that statement with the paper, also read the definitions and lemmas listed below. Atlas found them by following names in the source text and lists each after the names it uses. For x.foo, Atlas includes every foo defined here for a type, even when the statement may use only one of them.

It reaches all 5 other declarations of the file; with the theorem itself they span 20 lines. 2 of them are named in the statement itself.

Names in the namespace OAI.Ostmann are listed without it.

def primesline 9library
abbrev sumsetline 11library
def EventuallyPrimeSumsetline 13library
def TwoInfiniteSummandsImpossibleline 16in the statementlibrary
def InverseGoldbachline 19in the statementlibrary
theorem inverseGoldbachline 30selected theoremlibrary
theorem twoInfiniteSummandsImpossibleline 33selected theoremlibrary

import Mathlibnamespace OAIopen scoped Pointwise symmDiffnamespace Ostmanndef primes : Set ℕ := {n | Nat.Prime n}abbrev sumset (A B : Set ℕ) : Set ℕ := A + Bdef EventuallyPrimeSumset (A B : Set ℕ) : Prop :=  ∃ N : ℕ, ∀ n, N ≤ n → (n ∈ sumset A B ↔ n.Prime)def TwoInfiniteSummandsImpossible : Prop :=  ∀ A B : Set ℕ, A.Infinite → B.Infinite → ¬ EventuallyPrimeSumset A Bdef InverseGoldbach : Prop :=  ∀ A B : Set ℕ, A.Nontrivial → B.Nontrivial →    Set.Infinite (@symmDiff (Set ℕ)      (@SemilatticeSup.toMax (Set ℕ)        (@Lattice.toSemilatticeSup (Set ℕ)          (@CompleteLattice.toLattice (Set ℕ)            (@CompleteBooleanAlgebra.toCompleteLattice (Set ℕ)              (@CompleteAtomicBooleanAlgebra.toCompleteBooleanAlgebra (Set ℕ)                (@Set.instCompleteAtomicBooleanAlgebra ℕ))))))      Set.instSDiff (sumset A B) primes)theorem inverseGoldbach : InverseGoldbach := by  sorrytheorem twoInfiniteSummandsImpossible : TwoInfiniteSummandsImpossible := by  sorryend Ostmannend OAI

Every extracted statement of the accompanying papers

The statements the atlas extracted automatically from each accompanying paper’s TeX source, with links to the full sources.

The additive indecomposability of the primes

Theorem (Ostmann’s conjecture)

If A,B\subseteq\N_0 satisfy |A|,|B|\ge2, then (A+B)\mathbin{\triangle}\mathcal P is infinite. Equivalently, every finite modification of \mathcal P is additively indecomposable into two sets with at least two elements each.

Section 1, Introduction Read it in the paper TeX source, line 15

Show the TeX

If $A,B\subseteq\N_0$ satisfy $|A|,|B|\ge2$, then
$(A+B)\mathbin{\triangle}\mathcal P$ is infinite.
Equivalently, every finite modification of $\mathcal P$ is additively
indecomposable into two sets with at least two elements each.

Configuration and file facts

File: lean/ComparatorChallenges/OstmannComplete.lean
OpenAI’s Lean catalogue: OpenAI’s Lean catalogue does not list this as a main result; the release’s Lean notes for family 013 link it.
Solution module: OAI.NumberTheory.Ostmann.Complete
Allowed axioms: propext, Quot.sound, Classical.choiceThe axioms this configuration allows a proof to use. A replay shows which of them a proof uses.
Imports: Mathlib
Imports from outside Mathlib: None
Local vocabulary: 5 local vocabulary declarations
Lines of Lean, without comments or blank lines: 20
Second proof-verification program (nanoda): Off in OpenAI's configuration.

A shareable summary of this page: the proposed paper match, what the Lean statement expresses, and which reviews are recorded.

Plectis Atlas