Hadamard Matrix of Order 668
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.
Statement
There exists a Hadamard matrix of order : a matrix
such that
Equivalently, the rows of are pairwise orthogonal.
Context
Explicit construction of a Hadamard matrix of order 668, the smallest previously unresolved order, verified exactly by this site from the announcement plus its decoder reply. The same post encodes matrices for all twelve previously-open admissible orders below 2000 (668, 716, 892, 1132, 1244, 1388, 1436, 1676, 1772, 1916, 1948, 1964), and this site verified every one of them. The entry records the order-668 existence question, which this fully resolves; the general Hadamard conjecture - existence for ALL admissible orders - remains open, with the smallest unknown order now 2004 or beyond.
Order 668 has been the smallest open case of the Hadamard conjecture since order 428 was settled in 2004, and it is a named target in the design-theory literature and a listed FrontierMath open problem. Scored as one hard instance of a famous 1933 conjecture rather than the conjecture itself, which would sit far higher; placed level with a well-tracked specialist problem and below the household combinatorics conjectures.
People
Projects
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.
Interest
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
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.
The announcement itself is a bare sign string, but Alpoge's thread carries a credit line: "weekend fun w @tehwalris, Saul Reynolds-Haertle, and of course claude:)) i only claim bad suggestions!!" - which corroborates the three named collaborators (@tehwalris is Philippe Voinov) and confirms Claude was part of the working group, with Alpoge playfully disclaiming the good ideas. Which mathematical, computational or search steps were Claude's is still not stated anywhere, and no model version is given, so the tier stays at the floor the methodology prescribes for an unspecific disclosure.
Reviews
0 human reviews · 1 machine checkNo person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.
Machine check · not human verification
machine: correctscope Reproduction by the VibeMathed site
Fully reproduced here on 12 August 2026, in two passes. The announcement is a single X long-post holding 23,828 characters of "+" and "-": no prose, no separators. The first pass scanned the raw string for seed shapes and found three Goethals-Seidel quadruples (orders 892, 1132, 1244), verified exactly, but no order-668 seed - correctly, since the payload is not a seed list. What it missed is that Alpoge's own reply to the post is a decoder: a sed-obfuscated shell script declaring twelve records and five builder routines. This site reimplemented the sed transformation in Python, read the decoded script before executing anything (pure sed/sh, no network, writes only under /tmp), and ran it. It emits twelve sign blocks, and its header table independently names the four orders the raw scan had already found, cross-validating both decodings. Every block was then checked in exact integer arithmetic: entries in and on the nose, for = 668, 716, 892, 1132, 1244, 1388, 1436, 1676, 1772, 1916, 1948 and 1964 - all twelve previously-open admissible orders below 2000, exactly as the thread claims. The order-668 matrix has diagonal 668 everywhere and maximum absolute off-diagonal entry 0. The submitter reports an equivalent reproduction, done separately from this one. No independent expert review or published write-up exists yet, so site-confirmed records this site's own exact-arithmetic reproduction, not community acceptance.
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 endorsementsNo 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
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.