Mathematical manuscripts
Read the F01–F12 families, supplementary analyses, and full analytic papers. Search the on-site catalogue by subject or title.
Richard J. Reyes · public research · Lean 4
The central directory for mathematical manuscripts, the main Lean 4 proof project, research questions and formal verification. Find a subject, read its results, and follow each theorem to its exact source.
Research snapshots are source-dated. The 27 results are a curated selection, not the total theorem count; the 278 count includes Lean project files. The 300 GC questions are a research agenda, not 300 certified novel open problems.
Start here · Research directory
Explore complete analytic manuscripts, kernel-checkable proof sources, mathematical research questions, or the separate WCT object-coverage registry.
Read the F01–F12 families, supplementary analyses, and full analytic papers. Search the on-site catalogue by subject or title.
Begin at the MathProofs.lean import tree. Inspect the formalization README, exact theorem sources and manuscript-by-manuscript status.
Browse all 12 mathematical fields. Each GC entry includes its original problem statement, scoped target and mathematical review.
A separate coverage map of 142 canonical WCT objects, including proof status and links between symbolic claims and Lean declarations.
Primary formal entry point
MathProofs.lean.This file imports the main mathematics proof modules. The formalization manifest tracks manuscript scope, while the WCT Lean coverage map describes a distinct 142-object registry. Neither number should be mistaken for a count of independently resolved GC problems.
Explore by research subject
Choose the field first. Each route opens that subject's 25 preserved mathematical questions with the full question text and research reviews visible.
Time evolution, global existence, stability, breathers, and coherent states.
Energy minima, binding, compactness, solitons, and bifurcation.
Localization, curvature closures, and dimensional constraints.
Fourier analysis, spectral concentration, scattering, and thresholds.
Hamiltonians, stability, temporal derivatives, and no-go results.
Parameter recovery, Jacobian rank, and measurement limits.
Winding, knotted configurations, and field interactions.
Nonlinear pattern selection, defects, stochastic perturbations.
Finite versus physical computation, universality, and limits.
Formal PDEs, certified estimates, and proof checking.
Limits between wave models and effective equations.
Optical computing, physical noise, and information bounds.
Mathematical manuscripts · source-backed index
All 28 PDF entries and 21 subject headings from the current math manuscript catalogue. Paper publication, analytical proof and Lean formalization are distinct claims.
Loading the mathematical manuscript catalogue…
Read the canonical manuscript catalogue ↗.
Mathematics, explained first
Begin with the mathematical conclusion and its assumptions. Open a Lean declaration only when you want the exact formal statement. Nothing is omitted from the source.
A function space controlling the field and its weak derivatives up to second order in the square-integrable sense.
A field attaining the lowest energy among fields with a prescribed mass or norm.
Remaining close to the set of equivalent minimizing states, allowing the symmetries specified in the theorem.
A machine-checked derivation of exactly the formal statement under its visible definitions and hypotheses.
A broader research question in the Reyes Problem Repository. A related Lean theorem need not resolve the entire question.
A connected example: fourth-order nonlinear waves
For one two-dimensional cubic–quintic model, four separate theorems establish a connected path. The parameters and function spaces matter: this is not a statement about every nonlinear wave equation.
Splitting a fixed mass into two positive portions always raises the sum of the minimum energies, within the proved parameter range.
This strict energy gap is the binding step used when ruling out fragmentation of a minimizing sequence.
In the two-dimensional cubic–quintic setting: β, γ > 0; 0 < m ≤ mB; and every 0 < μ < m.
Apply the strict gap estimate to both portions of mass. Compare the energies per unit mass, then add them using μ + (m − μ) = m.
Scope: Two-dimensional cubic–quintic model with β, γ > 0 and 0 < m ≤ mB, not an all-mass theorem.
lean/MathProofs/StrictBinding.lean:531 · theorem strict_binding
theorem strict_binding (hβ : 0 < β) (hγ : 0 < γ) {m μ : ℝ} (hm : 0 < m) (hmB : m ≤ mB β γ k)
(hμ : 0 < μ) (hμm : μ < m) :
Imin β γ k m < Imin β γ k μ + Imin β γ k (m - μ) :=
Representative proof step from source
have h1 := gap (k := k) hβ hγ hμ hμm (by linarith)
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
The lowest constrained energy is achieved by at least one actual H² field, not merely approached by a sequence.
Attainment establishes a nonempty minimizing set on which the later orbital-stability statement is formulated.
Two-dimensional model; β, γ > 0; 0 < m ≤ mB. The result does not select a unique profile.
Construct a sequence of fields approaching the infimum. Compactness supplies a limit preserving both the mass and the minimum energy.
Scope: Whole-space minimizer set with compactness modulo translations, not profile uniqueness.
lean/MathProofs/WholeSpaceMinimizers.lean:1492 · theorem exists_minimizer
theorem exists_minimizer (hβ : 0 < β) (hγ : 0 < γ) {m : ℝ} (hm : 0 < m)
(hmB : m ≤ StrictBinding.mB β γ k) :
∃ U : H2 2, M U = m ∧ energy β γ k U = Imin β γ k m :=
Representative proof step from source
obtain ⟨-, -, -, U, hUm, hUE, -⟩ := compactness hβ hγ hm hmB hum hE
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
Every allowed H² initial state has exactly one solution defined for all positive and negative times.
Global existence and uniqueness supply the evolution needed by the subsequent stability theorem.
The specific two-dimensional fourth-order cubic–quintic evolution with γ > 0 and initial data in H².
Solve the global evolution in a transformed Hilbert-space representation, map it back to H², then use uniqueness of the transformed ODE.
Scope: Model-specific flow, not a general fourth-order PDE existence theorem.
lean/MathProofs/CubicQuinticFlow.lean:926 · theorem global_wellposed
theorem global_wellposed (hγ : 0 < γ) (u₀ : H2 2) :
∃! u : ℝ → H2 2, IsSolution β γ k u ∧ u 0 = u₀ :=
Representative proof step from source
obtain ⟨W, hW0, hW⟩ := exists_global (β := β) (γ := γ) (k := k) hγ (H2.toSp u₀)
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
Starting sufficiently close to the set of energy minimizers keeps the solution close to that entire set for all time.
The theorem turns variational information into a dynamical stability statement, without choosing a unique wave profile.
The specified 2D equation, β, γ > 0, 0 < m ≤ mB, with distance measured in H².
A variational stability estimate supplies the tolerance δ. Conservation of mass and energy then controls distance from the entire minimizing set for all times.
Scope: Set stability in the sufficient mass range, not uniqueness or stability of every excited state.
lean/MathProofs/OrbitalStability.lean:256 · theorem orbital_stability
theorem orbital_stability (hβ : 0 < β) (hγ : 0 < γ) {m : ℝ} (hm : 0 < m)
(hmB : m ≤ StrictBinding.mB β γ k) {ε : ℝ} (hε : 0 < ε) :
∃ δ > 0, ∀ u : ℝ → H2 2, IsSolution β γ k u → distX (u 0) (Gset β γ k m) < δ →
BddAbove (Set.range fun t => distX (u t) (Gset β γ k m)) ∧
⨆ t, distX (u t) (Gset β γ k m) < ε :=
Representative proof step from source
obtain ⟨δ, hδ, hcore⟩ := stable_core hβ hγ hm hmB (half_pos hε)
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
Nearby, genuinely different parameter choices can give the same eleven observations.
The local twenty-dimensional fiber shows structural ambiguity, beyond numerical ill-conditioning.
The frozen 31-parameter / 11-observation nonlinear map, with α ≥ 0.
The frozen Jacobian has an eleven-dimensional image and twenty-dimensional kernel. The local level-set theorem turns that kernel into a nonlinear family of indistinguishable parameters.
Scope: Local to the frozen model, not a global identification classification.
lean/MathProofs/V18Identifiability.lean:32 · theorem observed_local_level_set
theorem observed_local_level_set (alpha : ℝ) (ha : 0 ≤ alpha) :
HasTwentyDimensionalLocalFiber alpha :=
Representative proof step from source
exists_c1_level_set_chart observed (frozen alpha 5) (jacobian (frozen alpha 5))
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
A complex scalar's real-gradient Gram tensor has rank at most two on a four-dimensional tangent space.
This particular construction cannot define a nondegenerate Lorentzian metric, without ruling out other metric constructions.
A C¹ complex scalar on the specified four-dimensional smooth manifold.
The theorem combines Gram symmetry and nonnegativity with a rank-at-most-two bound. In dimension four that leaves a nontrivial kernel, so this tensor is degenerate.
Scope: Applies to this specific tensor construction, not all scalar-derived effective metrics.
lean/MathProofs/ManifoldScalarMetric.lean:247 · theorem main
theorem main (ψ : M → ℂ) (_hψ : ContMDiff I 𝓘(ℝ, ℂ) 1 ψ)
(h4 : Module.finrank ℝ E = 4) (p : M) :
(tensor I ψ p).IsSymm ∧
(∀ v, 0 ≤ tensor I ψ p v v) ∧
LinearMap.ker (tensor I ψ p) =
LinearMap.ker (mfderiv I 𝓘(ℝ, ℂ) ψ p).toLinearMap ∧
Module.finrank ℝ (LinearMap.range (tensor I ψ p)) ≤ 2 ∧
2 ≤ Module.finrank ℝ (LinearMap.ker (tensor I ψ p)) ∧
¬ (tensor I ψ p).Nondegenerate :=
Representative proof step from source
exact ⟨gram_symmetric _, gram_nonnegative _, gram_ker _, gram_rank_le_two _,
gram_nullity _ h4, gram_degenerate _ h4⟩
The first code block is the theorem statement with its hypotheses. The full source contains its Lean proof body and dependencies.
Cross-repository proof explorer
Every result has a readable explanation, its mathematical form, assumptions and limitations. The exact Lean theorem remains one click away, with a direct link to the full proof source.
Loading the public proof inventory. Read the source index on GitHub ↗
The displayed Lean signatures state the encoded theorem, not the proof body. A formal proof proves only the declaration under its hypotheses. The public 20-module selected index also references three currently private-repository files; these are deliberately excluded from this public-source showcase. Individual modules may overlap in mathematical subject.
Public source inventory · checked November 2, 2026
All 30 public repositories on the owner account were checked. These five contain Lean source. Counts include entry-point and project files, not only theorem declarations.
Loading public repository inventory…
Complete public code index
Source paths from the 30-repository public audit. A file appearing here does not by itself certify a theorem.
Loading 278 source files…
The repository links are primary sources. The highlighted 27 declarations are a guided reading path through these files, not an exhaustive verification audit. The source-code and manuscript evidence standards remain separate.
The research continues
The Reyes Problem Repository is the separate call for rigorous mathematics: choose a model, evaluate prior art, prove a statement or find a counterexample, and contribute the exact scope.