pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.05193 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-06 · 🧮 math.PR · cs.AI· math.AP· math.CA· math.FA

Grokability in five inequalities

Paata Ivanisvili , Xinyuan Xie This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 16:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.PR cs.AImath.APmath.CAmath.FA
keywords inequalitiesGaussian perimeterHamming cubeautoconvolutionSidon setsSzarek inequalitymathematical discovery
0
0 comments X

The pith

Grok suggested five inequalities that the authors verified as improvements over prior results in Gaussian geometry and discrete analysis.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reports five discoveries made in collaboration with Grok, each an inequality that the authors proved after the suggestion. These consist of a better lower bound for the largest Gaussian perimeter among convex sets in R to the n, sharper L two to L one moment comparisons on the Hamming cube, a stronger autoconvolution inequality, improved bounds on the largest g-Sidon sets up to n, and an optimal balanced Szarek inequality. The work shows that the AI can generate conjectures which, when checked, yield new mathematical facts. Readers might care as it provides concrete examples of AI contributing to inequality research in a verifiable way.

Core claim

The authors claim to have verified five inequalities proposed by Grok: an improved lower bound on the maximal Gaussian perimeter of convex sets in R^n, sharper L_2-L_1 moment comparison inequalities on the Hamming cube, a strengthened autoconvolution inequality, improved asymptotic bounds on the size of the largest g-Sidon sets in {1,...,n}, and an optimal balanced Szarek's inequality.

What carries the argument

The five Grok-proposed inequalities that serve as the specific advancements in their fields after verification.

If this is right

  • Convex sets achieve higher minimal Gaussian perimeters than earlier estimates allowed.
  • Moment comparisons on the hypercube become sharper in the L2 versus L1 regime.
  • The autoconvolution inequality is strengthened beyond its previous form.
  • g-Sidon sets have their maximal size bounded more precisely for large n.
  • The balanced Szarek inequality now holds with the optimal constant.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The method of AI conjecture generation followed by proof could be tested in additional branches of mathematics.
  • It remains to be seen how many such suggestions turn out to be both correct and new.
  • This division of labor between suggestion and verification may become a standard tool for researchers.

Load-bearing premise

The suggestions made by Grok during the collaboration are accurate inequalities that had not been established before the authors' work.

What would settle it

A single counterexample to any claimed inequality or the discovery of a prior proof of one of them would invalidate the report of new discoveries.

read the original abstract

In this note, we report five mathematical discoveries made in collaboration with Grok, all of which have been subsequently verified by the authors. These include an improved lower bound on the maximal Gaussian perimeter of convex sets in $\mathbb{R}^n$, sharper $L_2$-$L_1$ moment comparison inequalities on the Hamming cube $\{-1,1\}^n$, a strengthened autoconvolution inequality, improved asymptotic bounds on the size of the largest $g$-Sidon sets in $\{1,\dots,n\}$, and an optimal balanced Szarek's inequality.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports five inequalities discovered via collaboration with Grok and verified by the authors: an improved lower bound on the maximal Gaussian perimeter of convex sets in R^n, sharper L2-L1 moment comparisons on the Hamming cube, a strengthened autoconvolution inequality, improved asymptotic bounds on g-Sidon sets in {1,...,n}, and an optimal balanced Szarek inequality.

Significance. If rigorously correct and novel, these would constitute incremental advances in geometric probability, discrete Fourier analysis, additive combinatorics, and functional inequalities. The note format and emphasis on AI collaboration limit assessment of their technical depth or broader impact.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the five results are verified discoveries is unsupported because the manuscript contains no explicit statements of the inequalities, no proof sketches, no error bounds, and no verification steps for any of the five items. This directly prevents evaluation of correctness or novelty.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their review and the opportunity to clarify our manuscript. We address the single major comment below and commit to a substantial revision that incorporates explicit details for each result.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the five results are verified discoveries is unsupported because the manuscript contains no explicit statements of the inequalities, no proof sketches, no error bounds, and no verification steps for any of the five items. This directly prevents evaluation of correctness or novelty.

    Authors: We agree that the current manuscript is too concise and does not contain the explicit statements, comparisons, or verification details needed for independent assessment. The note was written to highlight the AI-collaboration aspect, but this came at the expense of technical content. In the revised version we will add a dedicated section for each of the five inequalities. Each section will state the precise inequality (including the improved constants or bounds), compare it to the best previously known result, and describe the verification performed by the authors (analytical proofs where available, or rigorous numerical checks with explicit error bounds otherwise). This will directly support the claim of verified discoveries and enable evaluation of novelty and correctness. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: paper reports externally verified inequalities without self-referential derivations

full rationale

The manuscript states that five inequalities were suggested by Grok and then rigorously verified by the authors. No derivation chains, parameter fittings, or first-principles steps are exhibited that reduce to the paper's own inputs by construction. There are no self-citations invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, no ansatzes smuggled via prior work, and no renaming of known results presented as new organization. The central claims rest on the authors' verification (external to any internal fitting loop), making the note self-contained against the listed circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract; the work rests on standard axioms of real analysis and probability theory.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5388 in / 1009 out tokens · 68556 ms · 2026-05-08T16:10:12.514878+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    K. Ball. The Reverse Isoperimetric Problem for Gaussian Measure.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 10:411–420, 1993. 17

    work page 1993

  2. [2]

    V. Bentkus. On the dependence of the Berry–Esseen bound on dimension.J. Statist. Plann. Inference, Volume 113, 2003, pp. 385–402

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Early science acceleration experiments with gpt-5,

    S. Bubeck, C. Coester, R. Eldan, T. Gowers, Y. T. Lee, A. Lupsasca, M. Sawhney, R. Scherrer, M. Sellke, B. K. Spears, D. Unutmaz, K. Weil, S. Yin, N. Zhivotovskiy. Early science acceleration experiments with GPT-5.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.16072, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Bubeck, J

    S. Bubeck, J. Ding, R. Eldan, M. Z. R´ acz. Testing for high-dimensional geometry in random graphs.Random Structures & Algorithms, Volume 49, Issue 3, 2016, pp. 503–532

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    R. L. Burden, J. D. Faires, and A. M. Burden,Numerical Analysis, 10th ed., Cengage Learning, Boston, MA, 2016. [6]C 1a Sidon set autocorrelation constant. Optimization Constants in Mathemat- ics. https://teorth.github.io/optimizationproblems/constants/1a.html, accessed April 16, 2026

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Cloninger, S

    A. Cloninger, S. Steinerberger. On suprema of autoconvolutions with an application to Sidon sets.Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, Volume 145, Issue 8, 2017, pp. 3191–3200

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Eskenazis and P

    A. Eskenazis and P. Ivanisvili, Polynomial inequalities on the Hamming cube,Probability Theory and Related Fields178(2020), 235–287

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    T. Feng, T. Trinh, G. Bingham, J. Kang, S. Zhang, S.-h. Kim, K. Barreto, C. Schildkraut, J. Jung, J. Seo, C. Pagano, Y. Chervonyi, D. Hwang, K. Hou, S. Gukov, C.-C. Tsai, H. Choi, Y. Jin, W.-Y. Li, H.-A. Wu, R.-A. Shiu, Y.-S. Shih, Q. V. Le, T. Luong. Semi-Autonomous Mathematics Discovery with Gemini: A Case Study on the Erd˝ os Problems.arXiv preprint ar...

    work page arXiv 2026

  9. [9]

    Y. Filmus. An Orthogonal Basis for Functions over a Slice of the Boolean Hypercube.The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, Volume 23, Issue 1, 2016

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    Filmus, H

    Y. Filmus, H. Hatami, S. Heilman, E. Mossel, R. O’Donnell, S. Sachdeva, A. Wan, K. Wim- mer. Real Analysis in Computer Science: A collection of Open Problems. Simons Institute (2014).https://simons.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/openprobsmerged.pdf

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Mathematical exploration and discovery at scale

    B. Georgiev, J. G´ omez-Serrano, T. Tao, A. Z. Wagner. Mathematical exploration and discovery at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.02864, 2025

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Haagerup

    U. Haagerup. The best constants in the Khintchine inequality.Studia Mathematica, Volume 70, 1981, pp. 231–283

    work page 1981

  13. [13]

    Herscovici, S

    O. Herscovici, S. Spektor. The best constant in the Khinchine inequality for slightly dependent random variables.arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.03562, 2020

    work page arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Ivanisvili and T

    P. Ivanisvili and T. Tkocz, Comparison of moments of Rademacher chaoses,Ark. Mat.57 (2019), no. 1, 121–128

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Ivanisvili, X

    P. Ivanisvili, X. Xie. Counterexample to majority optimality in NICD with erasures.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.20013, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    H. Ju, G. Gao, J. Jiang, B. Wu, Z. Sun, L. Chen, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, Z. Wang, W. He, P. Wu, L. Xiao, R. Liu, B. Dai, B. Dong. Automated Conjecture Resolution with Formal Verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.03789, 2026. 18

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  17. [17]

    Klivans, R

    A. Klivans, R. O’Donnell, and R. A. Servedio. Learning geometric concepts via Gaussian surface area. InProc. 49th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 541–550, 2008

    work page 2008

  18. [18]

    Kwapie´ n, R

    S. Kwapie´ n, R. Lata la, K. Oleszkiewicz. Comparison of moments of sums of independent random variables and differential inequalities.J. Funct. Anal., Volume 136, Issue 1, 1996, pp. 258–268

    work page 1996

  19. [19]

    Larsson-Cohn, Lp-norms of Hermite polynomials and an extremal problem on Wiener chaos,Ark

    L. Larsson-Cohn, Lp-norms of Hermite polynomials and an extremal problem on Wiener chaos,Ark. Mat.40(2002), 133–144

    work page 2002

  20. [20]

    Lata la, K

    R. Lata la, K. Oleszkiewicz. On the best constant in the Khinchin-Kahane inequality.Studia Math., Volume 109, Issue 1, 1994, pp. 101–104

    work page 1994

  21. [21]

    Martin, K

    G. Martin, K. O’Bryant. The symmetric subset problem in continuous Ramsey theory. Experimental Mathematics, Volume 16, Issue 2, 2007, pp. 145–165

    work page 2007

  22. [22]

    Martin, K

    G. Martin, K. O’Bryant. The supremum of autoconvolutions, with applications to additive number theory.Illinois Journal of Mathematics, Volume 53, Issue 1, 2009, pp. 219–235

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    Matolcsi, C

    M. Matolcsi, C. Vinuesa. Improved bounds on the supremum of autoconvolutions.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Volume 372, Issue 2, 2010, pp. 439–447

    work page 2010

  24. [24]

    Nadimpalli and C

    S. Nadimpalli and C. Pascale. On the Maximal Gaussian Perimeter of Convex Sets, Revisited. Preprint, 2025. arXiv:2508.20079

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Nayar and T

    P. Nayar and T. Tkocz. Extremal sections and projections of certain convex bodies: a survey.Harmonic Analysis and Convexity, 343-390, 2023

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    F. Nazarov. On the maximal perimeter of a convex set in Rn with respect to a Gaussian measure. InGeometric Aspects of Functional Analysis (2001–2002), pages 169–187. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 1807, Springer, 2003

    work page 2001

  27. [27]

    O’Donnell,Analysis of Boolean Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014

    R. O’Donnell,Analysis of Boolean Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    Oleszkiewicz

    K. Oleszkiewicz. Comparison of moments via Poincar´ e-type inequality. InAdvances in stochastic inequalities(Atlanta, GA, 1997), pp. 135–148,Contemp. Math., Volume 234, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1999

    work page 1997

  29. [29]

    M. Raiˇ c. A multivariate Berry–Esseen theorem with explicit constants.Bernoulli, 25(4A):2824–2853, 2019

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    Schinzel, W

    A. Schinzel, W. M. Schmidt. Comparison of L1- and L∞-norms of squares of polynomials. Acta Arithmetica, Volume 104, Issue 3, 2002, pp. 283–296

    work page 2002

  31. [31]

    S. Spektor. Restricted Khinchine inequality.Canadian Mathematical Bulletin, Volume 59, 2016, pp. 204–210

    work page 2016

  32. [32]

    S. J. Szarek. On the best constants in the Khinchin inequality.Studia Mathematica, Volume 58, 1976, pp. 197–208

    work page 1976

  33. [33]

    T. Tao. A crowdsourced repository for optimization constants?What’s new, 22 January 2026. https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/01/22/ a-crowdsourced-repository-for-optimization-constants/. 19

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    T. Tao. I encountered no issues with hallucinations or other AI-generated nonsense. Mathstodon post, 2 October 2025. Status 115306550084415351. https://mathstodon.xyz/ @tao/115306550084415351, accessed April 20, 2026

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    ThetaEvolve: Test-time Learning on Open Problems

    Y. Wang, S.-R. Su, Z. Zeng, E. Xu, L. Ren, X. Yang, Z. Huang, X. He, L. Ma, B. Peng, H. Cheng, P. He, W. Chen, S. Wang, S. S. Du, Y. Shen. ThetaEvolve: Test-time Learning on Open Problems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.23473, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    J. G. Wendel, Note on the gamma function,Amer. Math. Monthly55(1948), no. 9, 563–564. doi:10.2307/2304460

    work page doi:10.2307/2304460 1948

  37. [37]

    Available at https: //mathoverflow.net/questions/184286/(accessed April 3, 2026)

    What is the minimal Ck, such that every f:{− 1, 1}n →R of degree at most k sat- isfies ∥f∥ 2 ≤C k∥f∥ 1?MathOverflow, Question 184286, 2014. Available at https: //mathoverflow.net/questions/184286/(accessed April 3, 2026)

    work page 2014

  38. [38]

    D. P. Woodruff, V. Cohen-Addad, L. Jain, J. Mao, S. Zuo, M. Bateni, S. Branzei, M. P. Bren- ner, L. Chen, Y. Feng, L. Fortnow, G. Fu, Z. Guan, Z. Hadizadeh, M. T. Hajiaghayi, M. JafariRaviz, A. Javanmard, K. C. S., K.-i. Kawarabayashi, R. Kumar, S. Lattanzi, E. Lee, Y. Li, I. Panageas, D. Paparas, B. Przybocki, B. Subercaseaux, O. Svensson, S. Taherijam, ...

    work page arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    Learning to Discover at Test Time

    M. Yuksekgonul, D. Koceja, X. Li, F. Bianchi, J. McCaleb, X. Wang, J. Kautz, Y. Choi, J. Zou, C. Guestrin, Y. Sun. Learning to Discover at Test Time.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16175, 2026. 20

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2026