Arithmeticity of Degree-Six Symplectic Hypergeometric Monodromy Groups
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
Bajpai, Dona and Nitsche left three degree-six symplectic hypergeometric monodromy groups unclassified as arithmetic or thin. Two of the three, C-47 and C-55, are arithmetic.
Context
two of the three remaining cases; one is still unclassified
The thin-versus-arithmetic classification of hypergeometric monodromy groups is a well-defined programme, and these were the cases left open by the paper that set it up.
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 arithmeticity certificates were found with AlphaEvolve and then independently verified with exact matrix arithmetic over the rationals, so the search was the model's and the verification was exact rather than trusting.
two of the three remaining cases; one is still unclassified
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
The certificates are exact objects verified by exact rational matrix arithmetic, which is the right kind of check for a search result. arXiv preprint, not peer-reviewed.
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.