Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Evidence for the Cambie–Kalviainen walk
verify/: Links the complete independent mathematical review and distinct acceptance grade for the v1 source reconstruction and catalog consequence.
The complete local reconstruction of arXiv:2609.01766v1, Theorem 1, and its literal Problem 193 consequence survived independent review on 2026-09-08. A distinct grader passed the report contract and independence. The [[discrete_geometry/cambie_kalviainen_2026_small_step_walk/evidence/verify/source_proof_review|retained report and grade]] give the exact coverage, rederivations, attack, checklist, premises, source reading, and public-source exposure.
The reviewed conclusion uses at most sixteen steps. No exact-occurrence or optimality result, numerical L-tier, Lean verification, or historical-source proof credit is supplied. The argument is noncomputational and has no external theorem or native L-claim premise.
Exact reviewed subjects
These snapshots preserve the native Markdown text before review-standing and generated-metadata changes, exact apart from the PDF's SHA-256 value removed from the source digest copy on 2026-10-02. Relative links inside the snapshots refer to their original page locations. Their source-path mapping is also retained in the review.
| Snapshot | Original native page |
|---|---|
| Source digest | library/discrete_geometry/cambie_kalviainen_2026_small_step_walk/_index.md |
| Theorem and proof | library/discrete_geometry/cambie_kalviainen_2026_small_step_walk/theorem_1.md |
| Problem account | wiki/problems/discrete_geometry/E0193/_index.md |
The single canonical v1 PDF is identified on the source card. Both printed/PDF pages were visually inspected in the independent review. No executable certificate is required for the mathematical proof. Hashes and rendering establish artifact identity and reading access, not correctness.
The present theorem's statement, proof, catalog deduction, and dependencies are unchanged from the reviewed snapshot; the standing now records the accepted review. A substantive mathematical change requires reassessment.