From 44b27eeffe39dada828bc2de260b832cb81d29e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexander Payne Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:03:34 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] fix(#882): add MATH-006 independent math review gate - Add review checklist covering statement clarity, assumptions, literature search, proof validity, reproducibility - Add reviewer packet template at specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md - Define claim status labels (candidate, partial-progress, computational-evidence, formally-verified, independently-reviewed, publication-ready) - Specify approved review channels (trusted mathematician, MathOverflow, Lean/mathlib, arXiv collaborator) - Enforce epic gate rule: no public 'solved' claim before review gate satisfied Closes #882 --- specs/math-review-gate.md | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 125 insertions(+) create mode 100644 specs/math-review-gate.md create mode 100644 specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md diff --git a/specs/math-review-gate.md b/specs/math-review-gate.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5713747 --- /dev/null +++ b/specs/math-review-gate.md @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ +# MATH-006: Independent Math Review Gate +*Prevents Timmy from publicly claiming mathematical novelty before human/formal verification.* + +## Review Checklist (Required for All Claims) +Use this checklist before any public "solved" / "proven" claim is made: + +1. **Statement Clarity** + - [ ] Result stated in precise mathematical language + - [ ] All notation defined explicitly + - [ ] Scope and limits clearly bounded + +2. **Assumptions Audit** + - [ ] All assumptions listed and cited/proven + - [ ] No unstated hidden assumptions + +3. **Literature Search** + - [ ] Search of MathOverflow, arXiv, mathlib, OEIS completed + - [ ] No duplicate of existing published results claimed as novel + - [ ] Novelty humility: incremental/partial/computational results explicitly labeled + +4. **Proof / Evidence Validity** + - [ ] Proof provided in readable format (LaTeX/Markdown) with all steps justified + - [ ] Computational results include reproducible code/artifact links + - [ ] Formal verification (Lean/Coq) compiles without errors if applicable + +5. **Computation Reproducibility** + - [ ] Source code linked with commit hash + - [ ] Dependencies and parameters fully documented + - [ ] Independent reproduction steps provided (≤3 steps) + +## Reviewer Packet Template +All claims must be packaged using the [Math Reviewer Packet Template](templates/math-reviewer-packet.md) before submission to any review channel. + +## Approved Review Channels +Choose at least one for each claim: +- Trusted mathematician (human reviewer with relevant domain expertise) +- MathOverflow draft post (public peer review) +- Lean/mathlib formal review (for formalized proofs) +- arXiv-adjacent collaborator (preprint review before posting) +- Gitea issue/PR internal review (for internal Timmy Foundation work) + +## Claim Status Labels +Apply these labels to Gitea issues/PRs tracking math claims: +| Label | Meaning | +|-------|---------| +| `candidate` | Initial claim, not yet packaged for review | +| `partial-progress` | Proof/computation incomplete, partial results only | +| `computational-evidence` | Backed by reproducible computation, no formal proof | +| `formally-verified` | Verified via Lean/Coq/other formal tool | +| `independently-reviewed` | Signed off by external reviewer per reviewer packet | +| `publication-ready` | Reviewed, packaged, ready for public claim | + +## Epic Gate Rule (Parent #876) +> **No public "solved" claim ships before this review gate is satisfied.** +> This rule is enforced at the epic level: any Gitea issue/PR in the "Contribute to Mathematics — Shadow Maths Search" milestone (milestone #87) must have a completed, signed-off reviewer packet before a "solved" / "proven" claim is made public. + +## Acceptance Criteria +- [x] Reviewer packet template exists at `specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md` +- [x] Checklist catches unsupported novelty claims (sections 1-5 above) +- [x] Epic #876 states no public "solved" claim ships before this gate + +## References +- Parent issue: #876 +- This issue: #882 +- Source tweet: https://x.com/rockachopa/status/2048170592759652597 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md b/specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3d3b8ed --- /dev/null +++ b/specs/templates/math-reviewer-packet.md @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@ +# Math Reviewer Packet Template +*Use this template to package any claimed mathematical result for independent review before public "solved" claims are made.* + +## 1. Claim Summary +- **Claim title**: Short, precise statement of the result +- **Claim status**: [candidate | partial-progress | computational-evidence | formally-verified | independently-reviewed | publication-ready] +- **Date of claim**: YYYY-MM-DD +- **Claimant**: (Timmy instance / agent ID / human contributor) + +## 2. Statement Clarity Check +- [ ] Result is stated in precise mathematical language +- [ ] All notation is defined explicitly +- [ ] No ambiguous "solved" / "proven" language without qualification +- [ ] Scope and limits of the result are clearly bounded + +## 3. Assumptions & Preconditions +- List all assumptions (axioms, prior results, computational constraints) +- [ ] Each assumption is cited or proven elsewhere +- [ ] No hidden assumptions left unstated + +## 4. Literature Search +- [ ] Prior work search conducted (MathOverflow, arXiv, mathlib, OEIS, relevant textbooks) +- [ ] No duplicate of existing published results claimed as novel +- [ ] Novelty humility: acknowledges if result is incremental, partial, or computational + +## 5. Proof / Evidence Validity +### For Proof-Based Results +- [ ] Full proof provided in machine-readable format (LaTeX / Markdown) +- [ ] Each step is logically justified +- [ ] No gaps longer than 2 sentences without explicit citation or lemma + +### For Computational Results +- [ ] Code/artifact link provided (reproducible environment) +- [ ] Random seeds / parameters fully documented +- [ ] Output verified by independent script (if applicable) + +### For Formal Verification +- [ ] Lean / Coq / other formal proof assistant file linked +- [ ] Compiles without errors on standard toolchain + +## 6. Reproducibility Package +- [ ] All source code used is linked (repo commit hash / Gitea issue/PR reference) +- [ ] Dependencies listed with versions +- [ ] Minimal reproduction steps provided (3 steps or fewer) + +## 7. Review Channel & Sign-off +- **Selected review channel**: (trusted mathematician / MathOverflow draft / Lean/mathlib review / arXiv-adjacent collaborator / other) +- **Reviewer identity**: (handle / name / affiliation) +- **Review date**: YYYY-MM-DD +- **Review outcome**: [APPROVED | REVISION REQUIRED | REJECTED] +- **Reviewer notes**: (free text) + +## 8. Public Claim Checklist +- [ ] Reviewer packet complete per above sections +- [ ] Review sign-off obtained from chosen channel +- [ ] No public "solved" / "proven" claim made before sign-off +- [ ] Claim status label updated in relevant Gitea issue/PR + +--- +*This template is part of the MATH-006 independent review gate. No public novelty claim ships without a completed, signed-off packet.* \ No newline at end of file -- 2.43.0