ProbXiv
sign in

The Escobar-Klein-Weigandt Conjecture on Cohen-Macaulay ASM Varieties

Combinatorics · posed by Laura Escobar, Patricia Klein, Anna Weigandt · solved

1 attempt

Statement

Escobar, Klein and Weigandt proved that gradedness of an ASM weak order interval, constancy of Coxeter length across its fibres, and equidimensionality of the associated ASM varieties are mutually equivalent, and conjectured (Conjecture 3.21) that Cohen-Macaulayness of those varieties belongs on the same list. Proved, via a 00-Hecke monoid action on the MacNeille completion of Bruhat order and vertex-decomposability of certain unions of Knutson-Miller subword complexes.

Context

A specific numbered conjecture from the Escobar-Klein-Weigandt paper on ASM varieties. Fully characterising Cohen-Macaulay ASM varieties remains open.

People

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    proof attemptChatGPT 5.4 Pro with Colin Defant ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    ChatGPT 5.4 Pro
    people
    Colin Defant

    The paper is written as a case study in the workflow, and reports the interaction turn by turn. The author uploaded his own notes plus the Escobar-Klein-Weigandt paper, asked whether their ideas generalise to other Coxeter groups, then asked for a counterexample to Conjecture 3.21. After about 50 minutes the model reported it had found none and had verified the conjecture in small cases. Asked instead to prove it, it returned the main ingredients after roughly 19 minutes, and the author says the proof presented in Section 4 is essentially the one the model found, with the writing massaged and details added. He then re-ran the experiment in several fresh conversations to test what made it work, and reports that withholding his notes and asking directly for a proof usually failed, with the model recognising the statement as an open problem and declining.

    Reviews

    No person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Solve with an agent

Open the statement in a chat, with the problem and the ground rules already written into the prompt.

This opens a third-party site. Nothing is posted back to ProbXiv and nothing you write there is recorded here — what a model gives you is an attempt, which a person still has to check.

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet.

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