cert-machine · report · the verifier re-runs during every build

Erdős #1038: thirty decimals, and the last one is a rounding

The July 2026 Darvas–Peng–Tao manuscript solving Erdős–Herzog–Piranian (1958) defines its extremal constant D from the unique zero of a 3-dimensional nonlinear system. This page re-verifies the computational fragment in independent arithmetic — existence AND local uniqueness of the zero by the interval Krawczyk operator, a refinement to width < 10⁻⁴⁰, and a digit-for-digit audit of every decimal expansion the manuscript prints. All of it re-ran during this build: 26 checks green, 4 mutation controls rejected, verdict CONFIRMED.

tl;dr
  • The finding. All 30 printed decimals of the Darvas–Peng–Tao extremal constant verified by an independent route — the 30th digit is a rounding, and it is read correctly.
  • The mechanism. Existence AND local uniqueness of the defining zero by the interval Krawczyk operator — not bisection, the manuscript's route — refined to width below 10⁻⁴⁰, then every printed expansion audited digit by digit.
  • Check it. the page's own verifier re-ran during this build: 26 checks green, 4 mutation controls rejected — and it is filed on the claiming authors' repository.
checks, this build
26 / 26
the cited page's own verifier, re-run at build time; the build refuses on any failure
mutation controls
4 rejected
digit tamper, sign flip, box shift, constant perturbation — each must fail, and did
zero enclosure
< 10⁻⁴⁰
Krawczyk existence + uniqueness, then fixed-point BigInt interval refinement
claimed decimals
ALL CORRECT
D to 30 decimals, α, and the full p.24 constant block — digit for digit
the 30th decimal
a ROUNDING
the expansion continues …6351247…, so the printed …635125 is a correct half-up rounding, not an expansion prefix
replication
CROSS-TREE
their verifier, this repository's interval instruments — staged at build, same verdict
§0 · the margin

Agreeing is easy; agreeing with room to spare is the claim

An independent re-verification that lands just inside the manuscript's own box would confirm very little. These enclosures are narrower than that box by fifteen orders of magnitude, which is what makes the printed decimals decidable rather than merely consistent.

1e-45 1e-40 1e-35 1e-30 the box the manuscript needs (1e-30) this check's own bar q* 1.64e-45 u* 3.18e-45 v* 1.12e-45 width of the certified enclosure (log scale)
Each coordinate of the extremal triple, enclosed to a width of about 3.18e-45 by a Krawczyk argument in interval arithmetic — against the 1e-30 box Lemma A.1 asks for. That margin is why all 26 checks can be decisions rather than comparisons: every printed decimal, including all 30 of D, is either inside the enclosure or outside it, and 4 planted mutations were rejected on the same arithmetic.
§1 · the two findings

What the digit machinery decided

1 — Every constant the manuscript prints checks out. The p.24 block — q*, u*, v*, p*, α, r*, z*, and D to 18–19 decimals — matches the certified enclosures as exact truncations. The extremal value is real, unique in its box, and printed correctly.

2 — The headline D on p.2, printed to 30 decimals ending “…635125…”, is not an expansion prefix: the true expansion continues …6351247861…, so the 30th decimal of the expansion is 4, not 5. The printed value is a correct half-up ROUNDING, accurate to under 5·10⁻³¹ — but a trailing ellipsis conventionally promises an expansion. Not an error in the mathematics; a presentation defect only certified digit arithmetic can even see. (The same half-ulp class appears in the Erdős #852 audit — it is the benign end of the failure taxonomy named there.)

§2 · the method

Their definition, our arithmetic, nothing of theirs executed

The verifier re-derives everything from the manuscript's Appendix A definitions alone: consistency of the displayed derivatives with automatic differentiation; the certified face inequalities on the box B*; existence and LOCAL UNIQUENESS of the zero by the interval Krawczyk operator (a genuinely different route than the manuscript's scalar intermediate-value argument — Lemma A.1 confirmed both ways); containment of B* in the uniqueness box, so the manuscript's triple and ours are the SAME zero; and a BigInt fixed-point refinement to width < 10⁻⁴⁰ with directed rounding and explicit series tails. The authors' python-flint/Arb scripts were read for scope only — no line of theirs runs here, and no numeric value of theirs enters except the CLAIMED decimals under audit.

New in this rebuild: the verifier now runs against THIS repository's interval instruments (instruments/interval/, the lifted eqcert toolkit) staged at the core/interval path it searches for — a second implementation substrate reaching the identical verdict, re-established on every build.

§3 · scope

What was NOT audited, stated so it cannot be assumed

That D is the INFIMUM — the entire proof of the paper's Theorem 1.1 (normal form, forcing lemma, dual measure construction, endpoint certificate, sharpness) — was not audited: this page verifies the DEFINITION of D and its claimed digits, not its extremality. Also unchecked: the manuscript's other Arb and SymPy certificates (read for scope only), the authors' own κ sign-change proof of Lemma A.1 (the Krawczyk route replaces it; the lemma itself is confirmed), and the AI-use chronology. A verification note that does not draw this line invites the reader to assume more than was checked.

§4 · provenance

The cited page, byte-preserved

This page supersedes the one cited in the Erdős #1038 GitHub issue (Pengbinghui/pipeline-math#5, 2026-08-05); that page is preserved byte-identically in the repository (the citation path 301s here), beside the verifier itself — hash-pinned through this repository's lift provenance. Re-run it from the repository: node tools/build-report-lemniscate.js rebuilds this page and refuses unless the verifier is green.