Research in mathematics and AI
What should mathematics become with AI?
We’re exploring this question through practical research: solving problems, examining proofs, and reconsidering what mathematicians should spend their time on.
Our current focus is group theory. We welcome collaborators from other areas.
01 / RESULTS
Problems and solutions
Our first problem source is the Kourovka Notebook. Results from other collections will be added here.
Explore the results by source, verification status, or model. Open a solution summary to read the argument and its available proof.
PROGRESS BY PROBLEM SOURCE
Kourovka Notebook
27 solved problems
- Editor-accepted 3
- Team-checked 24
- Remaining 1,152
Our editor-accepted and team-checked solutions. Counts cover the full research pool, independent of table filters.
How we count progress
The eligible research pool contains 1,179 distinct Kourovka problem numbers: 1,164 from our September 14 screening catalogue, plus 15 earlier project results excluded from repeat screening. Remaining means not solved by this project, including problems with answers by other authors. Subquestions are not counted separately. Only our editor-accepted and team-checked solutions count as solved. Partial results, pending reviews, and solutions by other authors do not.
Showing 56 of 56 problems
| Problem | Problem source | Verification | Model & agent setup | Human contribution | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21.137 | Kourovka Notebook | Editor-accepted | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.137 — A non-powerful subgroup of p-th powers for every odd primeFor each odd prime p, an explicit group of order p³ᵖ⁺¹ and exponent p² has its set of p-th powers equal to a subgroup isomorphic to UT₃(F_p) × C_pᵖ⁻¹, which is nonabelian of exponent p. This gives a uniform negative answer to the odd-prime part of the problem. The Kourovka editors have accepted the case p = 3; the uniform write-up for all odd primes is team-checked and has been sent to the editors. Review status: Editor-accepted. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 21.137 | |||||
| 12.15 | Kourovka Notebook | Editor-accepted | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Publication pending |
| 21.148 | Kourovka Notebook | Editor-accepted | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.148 — Right-relatively convex subgroups with a distributive latticeIn the group of increasing bijections of the rationals with bounded displacement, the right-relatively convex subgroups are exactly the isolated subgroups and exactly the convex ℓ-subgroups. Their lattice is distributive but not a chain, giving a negative answer. The main ingredient is an orbital sandwich theorem, proved with a coding construction adapted from Hyde, Jonušas, Mitchell and Péresse. The Kourovka editors now list Kyrylo Muliarchyk’s paper as a solution. Review status: Editor-accepted. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 21.148 | |||||
| 14.67 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 14.67 — Largest centralizers and nilpotent subgroupsA counterexample of order 660,602,880 gives a negative answer, even when the nilpotent subgroup is normal and has nilpotency class two. An involution has a largest centralizer among nonidentity elements but does not centralize this subgroup. The write-up gives a self-contained proof without computer enumeration. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 14.67 | |||||
| 19.20 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.20 — Counting endomorphisms and partial isomorphismsA nonabelian group of order 512 has equally many endomorphisms and partial isomorphisms, giving a negative answer. The endomorphism count has a direct proof; the partial-isomorphism count uses exhaustive finite quadratic-map enumeration. The PDF includes a counting certificate and describes its verification; no claim of minimal order is made. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 19.20 | |||||
| 21.115 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-5.6 SolSetup: Legacy agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.115 — A sharp bound for complements of coset unionsIf n left or right cosets do not cover a finite group G, their complement has at least |G|/2ⁿ elements. The proof establishes this sharp bound through matrix-rank estimates, with equality attained by coordinate index-two cosets. A note by another author deposited on Zenodo on 2 August 2026 gives the same rank argument, so the problem was solved before our write-up. Review status: Solved elsewhere. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 21.115 | |||||
| 1.67 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 SolSetup: Legacy agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 1.67 — Invariants of a relation quotientThe write-up describes N/[F, N] for a minimal free presentation of a finitely presented group. Its abstract isomorphism type is determined by the Schur multiplier and a free abelian summand, independently of the chosen minimal presentation. It also discusses the limits of computing these invariants from an arbitrary finite presentation. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 1.67 | |||||
| 14.23 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-5.6 SolSetup: Legacy agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 14.23 — Bounds for bases of fixed subgroupsThe answer depends on whether the rank is fixed. For each fixed rank, a computable bound on basis lengths follows from existing algorithms for fixed subgroups. A single bound for all ranks is impossible: an explicit family of automorphisms of norm 2 provides counterexamples. The Kourovka editors have since accepted an independent solution by Olga Kharlampovich; our write-up remains available for reference. Review status: Solved elsewhere. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 14.23 | |||||
| 14.15 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 SolSetup: Legacy agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 14.15 — Commutator width of automorphism groupsThe commutator width of Aut(Fₙ) is infinite for every n ≥ 3. The argument draws on published results about quasimorphisms and verbal width, connecting the Notebook question to existing theorems rather than claiming a new general theorem. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 14.15 | |||||
| 21.68 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.68 — Semiabelian groups and monomial representationsAluna Rizzoli’s September 2026 paper gives a semiabelian nonmonomial group of order 2,592. The Kourovka editors list it as a solution. The earlier GPT-6 Astra web investigation is retained as provenance, not a claim of priority for the published result. Review status: Solved elsewhere. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. | |||||
| 8.74 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 8.74 — Intersections of good subnormal subgroupsThe submitted argument constructs two good subnormal subgroups whose intersection is not good, in a countable locally finite 2-group of derived length at most three. It proves goodness using an explicit augmentation-ideal bound. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 8.74 | |||||
| 16.53 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 16.53 — Generating a group from two coprime subgroupsA finite group G = ⟨A, B⟩ with d(A) = d(B) = 2, coprime orders |A| and |B|, and d(G) = 4 gives a negative answer already for d = 2. The subgroups live in a direct power of PSL(2, 11); the proof combines exact finite counts in this group of order 660 with Lagrange’s theorem and the fact that a homomorphism is determined by its values on generators. Two archived checkers agree, but an independent GAP reproduction is still pending. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 16.53 | |||||
| 10.46 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 10.46 — Double commutators with transvections over a noncommutative ringOver an explicit finitely presented noncommutative algebra R of characteristic two, a matrix σ in GL₃(R) has [[σ, T₁], T₂] of infinite order for every pair of nonidentity matrices with (Tᵢ − I)² = 0, so no such double commutator is unipotent. This refutes the statement for noncommutative R; it makes no claim about commutative rings or rings in which 2 is invertible. The proof rests on Gerasimov’s theorem on units of ring coproducts and a free-product tree argument, without finite enumeration. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 10.46 | |||||
| 6.38 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checkedPart (b), GL₂ in characteristic two | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 6.38 — Subgroups meeting every conjugacy class of GL₂The invertible monomial subgroup of GL₂ over the algebraic closure of F₂ meets every conjugacy class but is not parabolic. This refutes the general-linear assertion of part (b) as literally stated, in dimension two and characteristic two. The same monomial family appears in the Notebook archive for part (a), so no novelty is claimed, and other groups of Lie type are not addressed. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 6.38 | |||||
| 17.32 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 SolSetup: Legacy agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 17.32 — A Cayley–Hamilton analogue for free groupsThe proposed analogue fails for every rank n ≥ 2: explicit examples have n + 1 successive orbit elements generating the free group, while the first n generate a subgroup of infinite index. The write-up also gives counterexamples to a normal-closure variant at rank 2 and a subset variant at rank 3. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 17.32 | |||||
| 20.75 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.75 — Abelian normal subgroups with few generatorsFor the explicit integer N = 2¹²⁴²¹⁰³⁵⁰, a finite 2-group of order 2¹¹⁰ᴺ⁺¹ has every abelian normal subgroup generated by at most 32N + 1 elements, while it contains an elementary abelian subgroup requiring 65N generators. This gives a negative answer to Pyber’s question. The group multiplication is given by finite deterministic formulas, and the proof is self-contained without enumeration of the group or its subgroups. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 20.75 | |||||
| 21.99 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.99 — Transporters with exactly one fixed pointA solvable group of order 46,875,000,000 has a faithful transitive action of degree 23,437,500 with distinct points α and β such that every element taking α to β fixes exactly one point. This refutes Müller’s conjecture already for solvable groups. The group is an extension of F₅¹² by a group of order 192, and the fixed-point calculation is carried out directly on twelve affine blocks. Review status: Team-checked. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. Preview PDF for problem 21.99 | |||||
| 21.91 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-5.6 ProSetup: Web interface | To be documented | Publication pending |
| 9.4 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 9.4 — Groups generating classes of quasigroupsNegative answers to all three cases: varieties, quasivarieties, and pseudovarieties. The last case uses the original author’s convention of classes defined by disjunctive identities, rather than finite HSP closure. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 9.4 | |||||
| 9.45 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checkedFinite arithmetic criterion | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 9.45 — Orthogonal bases of rational latticesAn explicit, finite arithmetic criterion decides whether the lattice ℤⁿ + ℤa has an orthogonal integer basis, for every rational vector a. When the criterion holds, it constructs a basis. No polynomial-time bound or structural classification is claimed. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 9.45 | |||||
| 10.4 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 10.4 — Mixed varieties of finite p-groupsFor every prime p, finite p-groups of unbounded nilpotency class generate mixed varieties that are not ordinary varieties of groups. The obstruction is failure of closure under subgroups. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 10.4 | |||||
| 10.43 | Kourovka Notebook | Partial progressParticular cases; classification open | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 10.43 — Adjoint homomorphisms in even degreeAdjoint representations give explicit homomorphisms violating the stated condition for every even degree n ≥ 4 over a nonzero commutative ring in which 2 is invertible. This addresses the permitted particular cases, not the full representation classification. Review status: Partial progress. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 10.43 | |||||
| 11.99 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checkedEquation-counting criterion | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 11.99 — Counting characters through group equationsA criterion using only the group order and counts of solutions to commutator equations determines whether a finite group has an irreducible character of defect zero for more than one prime. It also counts those characters, without taking a character table as input. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 11.99 | |||||
| 13.1 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checkedAlgorithmic answer; structural scope qualified | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 13.1 — Coefficient reduction in integral group ringsFor every finite group G and prime p, terminating algorithms compute the image of U(ℤG) → U(𝔽ₚG), representatives of its kernel cosets, and a finite generating set for the kernel. This is an algorithmic answer; adequacy to a stronger intended structural classification and historical priority remain open. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 13.1 | |||||
| 18.109 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checkedRelative Lie rank | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 18.109 — Property (T) and finite Lie-rank-one quotientsA group with Kazhdan’s property (T) surjects onto PSU₃(q) for every prime q congruent to 7 modulo 12, giving infinitely many nonisomorphic finite simple quotients. Rank is understood in the relative, or BN-pair, sense. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 18.109 | |||||
| 18.59 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 18.59 — A linear obstruction to a periodic group constructionA linear-algebra obstruction over 𝔽₂ rules out the group required by the problem. The negative answer does not require the ambient group to be periodic. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 18.59 | |||||
| 19.3 | Kourovka Notebook | Partial progressParts (a)–(f); intended (g) unresolved | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.3 — Near Frattini subgroups of amalgamated productsFor proper amalgams, parts (a), (b), (c), (e), and (f) are affirmative, while (d) has a counterexample. Allowing collapsed amalgams changes several answers. The printed hypotheses of (g) are inconsistent; no intended repair of (g) is declared solved. Review status: Partial progress. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 19.3 | |||||
| 21.132 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.132 — Infinite Golod groups with finite centreFor every prime p, an infinite, three-generated, residually finite Golod p-group is constructed with centre of order p. The construction starts from Golod’s nil-algebra method. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 21.132 | |||||
| 18.120 | Kourovka Notebook | Pending review | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 18.120 — Factorizations of finite p-groupsAn unverified draft proposes a group of order 2³² with an exact factorization P = AB, where A is abelian and B has class two, but the required abelian subgroup B₀ cannot exist. The proposed negative answer includes A ∩ B = 1. Review status: Pending review. Unverified draft from the September 17 campaign. Earlier automated review reports do not override the project’s current verification status. Preview PDF for problem 18.120 | |||||
| 20.86 | Kourovka Notebook | Pending review | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.86 — Sylow counts and p-elementsAn unverified draft proposes a counterexample of order 719,323,136 at p = 7 to the inequality ℓᵖ ≥ kᵖ⁻¹. The argument computes the Sylow number and the number of 7-elements explicitly. Review status: Pending review. Unverified draft from the September 17 campaign. Earlier automated review reports do not override the project’s current verification status. Preview PDF for problem 20.86 | |||||
| 20.122 | Kourovka Notebook | Pending reviewParts (b) and inclusion-minimal (c) only | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.122 — Minimal triple intersections of nilpotent subgroupsAn unverified draft proposes a soluble group of order 96 refuting the inclusion-minimal assertions in (b) and (c). Part (a) and the minimum-order assertion in (c) remain open. Review status: Pending review. Unverified draft from the September 17 campaign. Earlier automated review reports do not override the project’s current verification status. Preview PDF for problem 20.122 | |||||
| 21.113 | Kourovka Notebook | Pending reviewPart (a) only | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.113 — A class function that is not a characterAn unverified draft proposes a group of order 58,320 for which the class function in part (a), at p = 2, has inner product −1 with an irreducible character. The conditional projectivity question in (b) is not settled. Review status: Pending review. Unverified draft from the September 17 campaign. Earlier automated review reports do not override the project’s current verification status. Preview PDF for problem 21.113 | |||||
| 11.23 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 11.23 — e-automorphisms and nil-automorphismsThe order-four cyclic shift on the fourth direct power of the first Grigorchuk group gives an e-automorphism that is not a nil-automorphism. The write-up includes a finite section certificate for non-nilness. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 11.23 | |||||
| 13.19 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 13.19 — Regularity of subdirect quotientsSubgroups H normal in Q inside four copies of UT₃(𝔽₂) both project onto every factor, yet Q/H is a nonregular 2-group of order 32. This gives a negative answer. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 13.19 | |||||
| 20.4 | Kourovka Notebook | Partial progressPart (c), p = 5 | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.4 — Normal p-subgroups of soluble cut groupsThe upper triangular matrix group B₆(𝔽₅) is a soluble cut group whose largest normal 5-subgroup has exponent 25. This refutes part (c) at p = 5; no answer to (a) or (b) is asserted. Review status: Partial progress. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 20.4 | |||||
| 20.30 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.30 — Group order and the largest conjugacy classAn explicit perfect centreless finite group has order greater than the square of its largest conjugacy-class size: the ratio is 250/3. The construction uses a finite Lie algebra over 𝔽₅. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 20.30 | |||||
| 20.76 | Kourovka Notebook | Team-checked | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.76 — Bounds on abelian subgroups of finite p-groupsAn explicit finite 2-group has all abelian normal subgroups of order at most 2⁴²ᵉ, but an elementary abelian subgroup of order 2⁸⁵ᵉ. This refutes the proposed bound. The construction is specified mathematically without enumerating the enormous group. Review status: Team-checked. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. Preview PDF for problem 20.76 | |||||
| 20.71 | Kourovka Notebook | Partial progressk = 4 only | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 20.71 — Vertex orbits and graph reconstruction cardsA connected graph on nine vertices has exactly four isomorphism types of vertex-deleted cards but five automorphism orbits. This answers the k = 4 case; no answer for k = 2 or 3 is claimed. Review status: Partial progress. Verified at the stated scope in the project’s 18 September 2026 register. The PDF may retain an earlier candidate or review-pending label; editor acceptance and priority are separate questions. | |||||
| 21.31 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Agentic setup | To be documented | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 21.31 — Regular subgroups of holomorphsAn explicit soluble group has a nonsoluble regular subgroup in its holomorph. The coordinate construction comes from Di Matteo, Ferrara and Trombetti’s July 2026 paper; the project supplies a direct-action certificate and makes no priority claim. Review status: Solved elsewhere. Model and setup attribution supplied by the project team. | |||||
| 5.25 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 5.25 — Ordered soluble groupsBludov, Kopytov and Rhemtulla (2009), Example 3.1, give the negative answer. The screening checked its fit to this exact Notebook question; no new project proof is claimed. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 6.5 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 6.5 — Constructibility and homological finitenessMartínez-Pérez and Nucinkis (2010), Theorem 1.1, supply the constructibility theorem covering soluble groups of integral type FP∞. The project identified the existing result. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 11.77 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 11.77 — Finite translation planesMontinaro (2007), Theorem 2.4(1), gives the classification: Desarguesian or Lüneburg translation planes. The screening checked the theorem’s scope; no new proof or editor recognition is claimed. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 12.17 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 12.17 — Autostable periodic abelian groupsMelnikov and Ng (2018), Theorems 1.3–1.4, give an exact effective description of computably categorical torsion abelian groups. This is an effective criterion, not an algebraic normal-form list. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 12.66 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 12.66 — Doubly transitive affine planesJha and Johnson (1998), Theorem 1.2, classify the planes as Desarguesian, Hall of order 9, or Hering of order 27. The screening checked the full case scope without independently auditing the proof. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 13.12 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 13.12 — Automorphism groups of hyperbolic groupsCarette (2011), Theorem 6.3, establishes finite presentability in the full hyperbolic-group scope. The project identified the published answer; no fresh proof audit is claimed. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 14.59 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 14.59 — Sharply three-transitive groupsTent (2016), Corollary 2.3, gives a negative answer using sharply three-transitive groups and the fixed-point behaviour of involutions. The screening checked the exact scope. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 15.36 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 15.36 — Levi classes of groupsShakhova (2018) gives a finite group whose Levi class has infinite axiomatic rank, answering the question negatively. The publisher’s abstract was authenticated; the full proof was not available for review. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 16.56 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 16.56 — Groups with restricted element ordersJabara, Lytkina, Mamontov and Mazurov (2014) give the affirmative answer. The published statement was checked against the required spectrum; the project did not independently inspect the full proof. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 17.75 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 17.75 — Actions of the Monster on finite 3-groupsLee and Popiel (2023), Section 3, give a negative answer: elements of order 41 obstruct the proposed action. The September editor update recognizes the answer; the project did not rerun the computational inputs. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 18.114 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 18.114 — Character-degree congruencesSchmid (2018) rules out the requested noncyclic irreducible 5′-subgroup. The screening authenticated the published full-answer claim, without reconstructing all proof dependencies. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 18.44 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 18.44 — Faithful irreducible representationsJones and Keller (2020) give the affirmative answer. The project authenticated the publisher’s exact statement, without an independent proof audit. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 19.4 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.4 — Near Frattini subgroups of free-group amalgamsAllenby (2000), Theorem 4, gives a family of cyclic amalgams answering both parts negatively, with the printed allowance of rank-one free factors. This is an existing construction, not a new project result. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 19.5 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.5 — Near Frattini subgroups of abelian-group amalgamsAllenby (2000), Theorem 4, gives a negative answer using a cyclic amalgam with a nontrivial near Frattini subgroup. The same published family also answers 19.4. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 19.41 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.41 — Conjugacy separability of free-by-cyclic groupsDahmani, Hughes, Kudlińska and Touikan prove that finitely generated free-by-cyclic groups are conjugacy separable. The full scope appears in version 2 and is recognized by the September editor update. The project did not independently audit the proof. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 19.94 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.94 — Distributions of elements in free metabelian groupsIonin and Semidetnov give a rank-two counterexample: identical distributions on finite metabelian groups do not force the same automorphism orbit. The September editor update records the negative answer. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
| 19.96 | Kourovka Notebook | Solved elsewhere | Model: GPT-6 AstraSetup: Literature screening | Original proof credited to the authors in the summary. | Summary & details ↓ |
Problem 19.96 — Definability of bases and primitive elementsKharlampovich and Miasnikov (2025), Theorem 3.21, define ordered free bases without parameters in every finite rank at least two. Projection then defines primitive elements, answering both parts. Review status: Solved elsewhere. The project identified an existing answer and checked its relevance at the scope recorded in the summary. This does not count as a new project solution. | |||||
No problems match these filters.
Updated 18 September 2026. Verification follows the project’s register at each result’s stated scope.
Human contributions and further run details are still being documented. Proofs will be published on GitHub.
Model and setup labels describe how each result was obtained; they are not a controlled comparison of approaches.
What do the verification statuses mean?
- Editor-accepted
- Accepted by the Kourovka editors as reported by the project team, or listed as a solution in their official repository. This is distinct from journal refereeing.
- Team-checked
- Verified by the project at the stated scope. This status does not imply editorial acceptance, historical originality, or formal verification.
- Partial progress
- Verified results for specified cases or a qualified formulation. The full problem remains unresolved; the scope is stated in the record.
- Pending review
- A proposed solution is awaiting checks by the project team.
- Solved elsewhere
- An existing published or editor-recognized answer identified by the project. Authorship is credited in each summary; screening an existing result is not a new project solution.
The new mathematics
What we want AI
to contribute to mathematics
We care about the questions, structures, and ideas that people find meaningful, useful, beautiful, or worth understanding.
A proof establishes a result. Understanding gives us more: the ideas behind it, its connections to other mathematics, and ways to explain, simplify, and use it. We believe this work deserves as much attention as proving new things.
As AI takes on more technical computation, search, and routine derivation, mathematical judgment becomes more central. We still need to choose worthwhile questions, look for conceptual explanations, and develop a sense of what is fruitful, illuminating, or reusable.
The Maidenhead Project puts these ideas to work on longstanding questions. We began with the Kourovka Notebook, a collection of open problems in group theory. We use AI-assisted research to revisit those questions, check the resulting arguments, and work toward explanations that others can build on.
Our wider ambition reaches into how mathematics is taught and how mathematical work is valued. We want to cultivate judgment and connections across fields, help newcomers develop mathematical taste, and give explanation and teaching the recognition they deserve. Deep expertise, research leadership, explanation, and teaching all help mathematics grow.
Understanding and explaining a result deserve as much attention as proving it.
Choosing problems
Ask why a question matters and where it might lead. Mathematical taste helps direct the effort.
Checking and explaining
Scrutinize the proof, find its central ideas, and make the argument understandable.
Teaching and collaboration
Share methods and connections. Value the people who explain, teach, and help others enter the field.
Tools and documentation
Our research setup
We’re developing a system of AI agents for mathematical research. We plan to publish the code so other mathematicians can use it, examine how it works, and improve it.
The records distinguish work in a web interface from our agentic setup and its legacy version. Available write-ups are hosted here while we prepare the research repository for release. We want that account to explain the core idea, how it connects to existing mathematics, and what others can reuse. Checking an argument and making it understandable are both part of the work.
Maidenhead research setup
Our repository is currently private. We’re preparing it for public release.
04 / TEAM
Our team
We bring together experience in mathematics, AI, and mathematical education.
Prof. Elena Bunina
Bar-Ilan University
Prof. Alexei Miasnikov
Stevens Institute of Technology
Vlad Stepanov
AI in Math & Math Education Lab, Stevens Institute of Technology
Stan Fedotov, PhD
Nebius Academy
Maria Matveeva
AI in Math & Math Education Lab, Stevens Institute of Technology
Kyrylo Muliarchyk, PhD
Bar-Ilan University
We welcome new collaborators.
05 / CONTRIBUTE
Work with us
project@maidenhead.solutionsEmail us to get involved. Pull requests will be welcome when the GitHub repository is public.
Check a proof
Review a proposed solution and help us identify gaps, errors, or ways to improve the argument.
Suggest a problem
Suggest an open problem and explain its mathematical interest or connections to other work.
Improve the setup
Try the agents, test different approaches, or contribute improvements to the code and documentation.
Submit a solution
Share your proof, its central idea, and how you found it, including the role of AI and human work.
Explain an idea
Simplify an argument, explain a connection, or write an account of a result for a wider mathematical audience.