The Abbott-Hanson Recurrence for Schur Numbers
Nothing has been published against this problem here, and nobody has checked anything. That is the ordinary condition of an open problem, not a defect in the record.
Statement
The classical Abbott-Hanson recurrence gives for Schur numbers, and had stood as the basis for the best asymptotic lower bounds. Shifted -templates, a more flexible form of Rowley's template construction, yield and hence improved lower bounds.
Context
improves the classical recurrence; the exact Schur numbers beyond S(5) remain unknown
Schur numbers are a classical Ramsey-theoretic quantity where progress is rare and the Abbott-Hanson recurrence had been the standard tool for over fifty years.
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. 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.
The abstract says the shifted -template construction was discovered during a conversation with ChatGPT 5.5 Pro and then refined, verified and extended to multiple templates by the authors, and the conclusion describes the paper as building on an original idea of the model.
improves the classical recurrence; the exact Schur numbers beyond S(5) remain unknown
Reviews
0 human reviews · 0 machine checksNo person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.
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.