ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

1.28249... Lower Bound and Partial Upper Bounds for Cost-Preserving Single-Source Unsplittable Flows

Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.

1-28249-lower-bound-and-partial-upper-bounds-for-cost-preserving-single-source-uCombinatoricsposed by Dinitz, Garg, Goemans, 1999recorded: partial

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

For a single-source unsplittable flow, find the optimal universal additive constant CC s.t. every feasible fractional flow xx with arc costs cc should admit an unsplittable routing yy with cycxc^\top y \le c^\top x and yaxa+Cdmaxy_a \le x_a + C \cdot d_{\max} on every arc. Goemans conjectured C=1C=1; this was disproved in July 2026 by a separate seven-vertex counterexample with critical constant 16/1516/15 (see the Dinitz–Garg–Goemans entry), leaving the optimal CC open.

Lower bound: a seventeen-terminal common-point interval instance certifies C  12824947979848435211018=1.28249C\ \ge\ \frac{1282494797984843521}{10^{18}}=1.28249\ldots

Upper bounds: the paper proves the first unconditional ceiling below 2, but for the codimension-two case only, at complement mass q=2q=2. The record cells lie outside it, the k=17k=17 instance having q=11q=11, so that ceiling does not bound the record ladder. Two figures are conjectures rather than results: 4/34/3 as the supremum of critical constants over common-point cells, approached but not attained and not an extrapolation from the ladder (Conjecture 1.1, Theorem 5.1), and 22 for the universal constant itself (Conjecture 1.2). The proved gap remains [1.28249, 2][1.28249\ldots,\ 2].

Context

Record lower bound only. The sub-2 ceiling is the codimension-two case and does not bound the record ladder (k=17 has complement mass 11). 4/3 and 2 are conjectures; the proved gap is [1.28249, 2].

The residual optimal-constant question left open by the Dinitz-Garg-Goemans disproof; specialist, but rooted in a well-known 1999 conjecture.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    constructionGPT-5.6 Sol, Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 5 with Sergey Nikolenko ·
    AI involvement
    ai co developed
    a person and a model developed the result together.
    models
    GPT-5.6 Sol, Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 5
    people
    Sergey Nikolenko

    GPT-5.6 Sol, Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 5 carried out the search for constructions, symbolic envelope derivations, proofs, and the exact-verifier development; the human author framed the program, directed the search, set the claim scope, and verified all results independently by hand.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from VibeMathed site check ·

      scope Reproduction by the VibeMathed site

      The k=17 lower bound is a finite certificate: the verifier rebuilds the 67-arc instance from raw interval data, rediscovers all paths by DFS, and enumerates all 2^17 routings in exact rational arithmetic. Re-run by the site from a clean clone on 2026-08-01; the exact constant, 15 minimizers, and 18-atom hull certificate reproduce. The deletion-star ceiling theorems are conventional proofs in an unreviewed preprint, checked by the author only, with no independent expert review and no formalization. Tier reflects the site's confirmation of the certificate; the structural results remain unreviewed.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.