DomTheDeveloper / DomTheDeveloper/crl

External reviewers wanted: signed Bernstein obstacle audit reports

Open
#102 9 comments 0 reactions 1 assignee View on GitHub

@DomTheDeveloper is already working on this.

Since Jul 20, 2026.

help wanted
Dominant language
Lean
Stars
0
Forks
1
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Purpose

Recruit genuinely independent reviewers for the final Bernstein–Bézier obstacle theorem package using math/bernstein_obstacle/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_PROTOCOL.md. No email campaign is being used.

Final frozen review target

  • immutable branch: review/bernstein-obstacle-v4-final
  • commit: 61594952ad880d2b61759cfa93a19df979183c09
  • analytical integration PR: #114

Reviewers beginning now must audit V4, not the moving research branch or superseded v1/v2/v3 statements.

Material V4 improvements

  1. Corrected local-size risky set and one-ring geometry.
  2. Uniform broken H^{r+1} assumption.
  3. Shared-DOF support enlargement from R_h to omega_h.
  4. Multi-face physical-boundary proof covering corner elements.
  5. Tubular, compact-interior, and physical-boundary positivity split.
  6. Explicit multiplier sign convention and exact energy identity.
  7. Constructive scheduled-stage Lean theorem from mesh thresholds.
  8. ThresholdSobolevFEMRecoveryData connecting local analytical estimates to the verified Mosco/minimizer endgame.
  9. Corrected Hertz phase-sensitivity data and project-internal replication wording.

Candidate PR #117 ports the coordinate-free Hilbert VI and nested recovery-to-strong-convergence theorem onto V4. Reviewers should treat it as a candidate addition until its pinned audit is green.

Review panels

  • #98 — prior-art collision — FUN BUX: 3,500
  • #99 — Mosco/FEM recovery — FUN BUX: 4,500
  • #100 — free-boundary clipping and h_Gamma^(3/2)FUN BUX: 4,500
  • #101 — Lean statement faithfulness — FUN BUX: 2,500

These are unfunded internal effort/complexity labels. They are not real or promised bounties. No payment is represented as available unless separate written funding terms are posted.

How to volunteer

Post your panel, expertise/profile, conflicts, and confirmation that you will review commit 61594952ad880d2b61759cfa93a19df979183c09.

A final report must state PASS, PASS AFTER CORRECTION, or FAIL, answer every panel item, and post the report artifact SHA-256. Counterexamples and corrected narrower theorems are fully eligible.

Independence boundary

Repository-owner reviews, automated-agent outputs, and project-internal implementations do not count as independent endorsement. The theorem will not be advertised as externally confirmed until qualified reviewers post public signed reports.

Issue #103 separately requests outside computational reproduction; the scikit-fem implementation in the repository is project-internal, not clean-room independent validation.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.