ProofAtlas research case study

Starting frontierJackson's unrestricted conjectureAI-developed checked counterexampleExplicit order-12 Lean-checked counterexample
Evidence and status →

Graph theory · formal theorem

12-Vertex Hamilton Counterexample

Kernel-checked Lean proof that an explicit 12-vertex regular bipartite tournament has no Hamilton decomposition. The statement matches the unrestricted formulation recorded by Granet and Liebenau–Pehova.

Scope: The explicitly encoded 12-vertex orientation of K₆,₆ is a bipartite tournament, has indegree and outdegree three at every vertex, and has no Hamilton decomposition.

Lean checkedBuild passed
Unfinished proof stepsNone
PublicationAccepted formal theorem
Jackson counterexample statement mapAn explicit orientation of K₆,₆ is checked to be a regular bipartite tournament, while the flipped-C₄ opposite-pair structure forces a parity obstruction to any Hamilton decomposition.
Exact scope: The explicitly encoded 12-vertex orientation of K₆,₆ is a bipartite tournament, has indegree and outdegree three at every vertex, and has no Hamilton decomposition.

Exact formal proposition

Hypotheses and conclusion

theorem flippedC4Blowup_counterexample :
    CounterexampleStatement candidateTournament

Result boundary

What this theorem does—and does not—establish

The explicitly encoded 12-vertex orientation of K₆,₆ is a bipartite tournament, has indegree and outdegree three at every vertex, and has no Hamilton decomposition.

Line counts exclude blank lines; comments and documentation count. The total is the commit-pinned first-party Lean import closure; Mathlib and other third-party dependencies are excluded.

Continue the mathematics

Open questions and extensions

The pinned theorem and its complete local import closure let people and AI agents inspect the proof, compare another route, isolate reusable lemmas, or formulate a stronger exact statement. Lean checks each proposed extension against its own exact statement.

What the source ZIP contains

The ZIP contains the checked first-party Lean import closure, exact statements and boundaries, license, notice, evidence, source-footprint manifest, and continuation data. Mathlib and other third-party dependencies are not bundled.

Independent review

Review record

Independent review accepted

Lean checks the exact proof. Independent reviewers accepted evidence completeness, statement alignment, scope, and public wording; the visual review covers explanation only.

01

Formal evidence

Independent review accepted the recorded build, exact declarations, unfinished-step scan, and axiom evidence.

02

Statement alignment

The formal declaration was accepted against the named theorem and its exact variant.

03

Result boundary

The accepted boundary keeps nearby stronger or commonly confused claims out of scope.

04

Public wording

Independent review accepted the retained theorem explanation and source presentation. Generated media follows a separate review and promotion gate.

05

Canonical source

The first-party source link is pinned to the checked package commit and exact Lean file.

06

Accepted result

A validated accepted-result record binds the four reviews to the checked formalization.

Credit for this release

Contributors and roles

Authorship and other contributions are recorded separately for this version.

Authorship

Lean formalization
Lech Mazur
Mathematical proof
Lech Mazur

Contributions

  • Upstream attributionBertille Granet

    Bertille Granet is credited for the prior flipped-C4 construction, opposite-pair structure, unrestricted formulation, and sufficiently-large theorem.

    • Problem framing
    • Proof strategy
  • Direct contributionLech Mazur

    Lech Mazur contributed the explicit class-size-three obstruction, matching-parity proof, and checked Lean formalization.

    • Counterexample
    • Formalization
    • Proof strategy
    • Source maintenance

Selected reviews

Review record

Each entry names the question reviewed, its exact scope, and the reviewer provenance recorded for this release.

Download exact review bindings

Formal-evidence review

Formal-evidence review of the exact checked counterexample package.

Reviewer
OpenAI Codex / GPT-5
Independence
Independence not asserted

Limits of this review

  • The heavy Lean build was not rerun; the reviewer audited the retained transcript and exact evidence bindings.
Public-wording review

Public-wording review of the retained narrow counterexample presentation.

Reviewer
Claude Fable 5
Independence
Independence not asserted

Limits of this review

  • The wording review did not establish historical novelty, priority, or specialist approval.
Result-boundary review

Result-boundary review of the exact twelve-vertex counterexample.

Reviewer
Claude Fable 5
Independence
Independence not asserted

Limits of this review

  • The review did not establish historical novelty or priority, inspect the full Jackson 1981 paper, or convert computation into theorem evidence.
Statement-alignment review

Statement-alignment review of the exact counterexample declaration.

Reviewer
Claude Fable 5
Independence
Independence not asserted

Limits of this review

  • Primary-paper comparison used retained source quotations rather than a fresh paper fetch.

Citation

Cite this release

Use the version-specific citation so the authorship, scope, and public record remain attached.

Release history

Versions and public record

Release
Counterexample release
Version
v001
Published
Canonical page
Open canonical page

Release chronology

This version is part of the release history. No independent external timestamp is claimed.

Scope of this release

  • Computational minimum order is corroborating evidence and is not Lean-verified.
  • Granet's sufficiently-large theorem is unaffected.
  • Historical novelty of the class-size-three obstruction remains under specialist review.
  • No independent external priority anchor is recorded.
  • The flipped-C4 construction and opposite-pair structure are upstream work due to Bertille Granet.