ProbXiv
sign in

The Graveyard Problem for Dissipative Barrier Truncations

Analysis · posed by Marco Marletta, Sergey Naboko, 2014 · solved

1 attempt

Statement

The dissipative barrier method suppresses spectral pollution when a differential operator is truncated, but can it hide genuine spectral points? Known as the graveyard problem, the question stayed open in dimension two and above for more than a decade. It cannot: for Schrodinger operators in dimensions d2d \ge 2 no spectral point becomes invisible, which together with the known one-dimensional theorem settles no-invisibility in every dimension.

Context

A decade-old named obstruction in computational spectral theory, the remaining gap in whether dissipative barriers are a trustworthy numerical method.

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-based agent system with Matthew J. Colbrook, Marco Marletta ·
    AI involvement
    ai assisted
    a person led the work and used a model along the way.
    models
    ChatGPT-based agent system
    people
    Matthew J. Colbrook, Marco Marletta

    An unusually candid account, and the reason this entry sits at the lowest tier despite the models mattering. The first author built a system of ChatGPT-based agents to propose, test and attack proofs of the no-invisibility theorem. After false starts, including arguments with real gaps and arguments leaning on results that do not exist, the agents converged on a strategy Marletta and Naboko had already dismissed for want of a reversed Hansmann estimate. The final two lemmas the agents produced were not trusted. Suspecting the idea was a distorted echo of human mathematics in the training data, the authors searched for the uncited human source and instead found two stronger 2024 papers of Gil that supply exactly the reversed estimate. So the agents supplied direction, not the proof.

    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.