ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

Tverberg Plus Minus

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.

tverberg-plus-minusRepresentation Theorymath.COmath.RTposed by Imre Bárány, Pablo Soberónrecorded: open · 1 machine check, unexamined

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

If we remove the equal coefficients condition, does Theorem 4.1 hold with n=d+1n = d + 1?

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "Tverberg Plus Minus", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

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.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

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

1 attempt

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.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Reconstructed statement: For integers d1,r2d\ge1,r\ge2, let F1,,Fd+1RdF_1,\dots,F_{d+1}\subset\mathbb R^d be pairwise disjoint color classes of size rr, and let M[d+1]M\subset[d+1]. Does there always exist a colorful partition A1,,ArA_1,\dots,A_r, AjFi=1|A_j\cap F_i|=1, and a common point zRdz\in\mathbb R^d with affine representations

    z=i=1d+1αi,jxi,j,i=1d+1αi,j=1,z=\sum_{i=1}^{d+1}\alpha_{i,j}x_{i,j},\qquad \sum_{i=1}^{d+1}\alpha_{i,j}=1,

    where xi,j=AjFix_{i,j}=A_j\cap F_i, such that either all coefficients with iMi\in M are negative and all coefficients with iMi\notin M are positive, or the reverse sign pattern holds? This is Theorem 4.1 of Bárány–Soberón with the equal-coefficients condition removed and n=d+1n=d+1.

    Result: The statement is false already for d=1,r=3d=1,r=3.

    Choose two color classes

    F1={a1,a2,a3},F2={b1,b2,b3}RF_1=\{a_1,a_2,a_3\},\qquad F_2=\{b_1,b_2,b_3\}\subset\mathbb R

    with algebraically independent coordinates and order

    a1<b1<b2<a2<a3<b3.a_1<b_1<b_2<a_2<a_3<b_3.

    Let M={1}M=\{1\}.

    In one dimension, for a pair (a,b)(a,b) with coefficient of aa negative and coefficient of bb positive, the common point zz must lie beyond bb on the ray from aa through bb; equivalently, bb lies strictly between aa and zz.

    Suppose first F1F_1 has negative coefficients and F2F_2 positive coefficients. Then bb-points must be matched to aa-points so that each matched bb lies between its aa and the same zz.

    If z>a3z>a_3, then both a2a_2 and a3a_3 require a matched bb-point to their right, but the only such bb-point is b3b_3, impossible. Hence z<a3z<a_3. Then a2,a3a_2,a_3 must both be matched to distinct points among b1,b2b_1,b_2, forcing z<b1z<b_1. But then a1a_1 has no bb-point between a1a_1 and zz, contradiction.

    The reverse sign pattern is the same argument after interchanging the two colors and applying xxx\mapsto -x, since the transformed order is again

    n1<p1<p2<n2<n3<p3.n_1<p_1<p_2<n_2<n_3<p_3.

    Thus neither sign alternative is possible for any colorful partition.

    So Theorem 4.1 cannot hold with n=d+1n=d+1 after removing the equal-coefficients condition.

    Citation: Counterexample above. The reconstructed problem is from Bárány–Soberón, “Tverberg Plus Minus,” Open Problem 4.1/4.2.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The claimed counterexample attacks the correct statement: Theorem 4.1 with the equal-coefficients requirement removed and n=d+1n=d+1. For d=1,r=3,n=2d=1,r=3,n=2, the order

      a1<b1<b2<a2<a3<b3a_1<b_1<b_2<a_2<a_3<b_3

      with M={1}M=\{1\} indeed prevents either sign pattern. In one dimension the sign condition forces the positive-color point to lie strictly between the negative-color point and the common zz; the counting/order argument rules out all matchings, and the reverse pattern follows by swapping colors and reflecting the line.

      The proof is essentially complete, and I found no prior published resolution/counterexample in the relevant searches.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: The counterexample appears genuinely new, but it is a very small d=1,r=3d=1,r=3 order example with a short proof. It gives a negative answer to the Bárány–Soberón question, but as a standalone contribution it is likely too minor for an ordinary combinatorics journal paper; it would fit better as a brief note, remark, or addendum.

      Literature check: I found the correct original source as Bárány–Soberón, “Tverberg Plus Minus,” arXiv:1612.05630 / Discrete Comput. Geom. 60 (2018), 588–598, DOI 10.1007/s00454-017-9960-1. I also found Blagojević–Ziegler, “Plus minus analogues for affine Tverberg type results,” arXiv:1905.07715, which proves a plus-minus analogue of the optimal colored Tverberg theorem and partially answers the Bárány–Soberón question in prime/primes-minus-one cases. This does not cover the r=3r=3 counterexample here. Searches through arXiv/Springer/OpenAlex/DBLP/Bing snippets/GitHub and phrase searches for the open problem, equal-coefficients condition, and counterexamples did not reveal an existing negative answer.

      Citation: Bárány, I.; Soberón, P. “Tverberg Plus Minus.” Discrete Comput. Geom. 60 (2018), 588–598.
      Blagojević, P. V. M.; Ziegler, G. M. “Plus minus analogues for affine Tverberg type results.” arXiv:1905.07715.

      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 endorsements

    No 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

no comments

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.