carlok — zsh — 88×30

cat _posts/2026-09-28-magma-1518-obstruction-lean-narrows-its-palomar-package-to-theorem-a-after-the-registry-s-automated-review.md

magma-1518-obstruction-lean narrows its Palomar package to Theorem A after the registry's automated review

Palomar’s automated review declined registration of magma-1518-obstruction-lean on two grounds, and both are now answered. The first was an overstatement: the abstract, the source record and the Challenge account presented “no finiteness” and “one target law instead of four” as a strengthening of the cited conjecture, while the repository’s own prior-work account says the conjecture carried no finiteness hypothesis — the README and notes had been corrected on 13 September, the metadata and the Challenge docstring were missed, so the repository contradicted itself in the two places a reviewer reads first (5d521ea). The second was scope: the compared declarations included the F5 and F13 members of Theorem F, two concrete finite examples rather than the family, and the review did not find research interest established for that group. The package now compares Theorem A and Corollary A′ alone, Challenge.lean falls from 178 to 84 lines, the family facts stay audited under their library names, and gen_palomar.py grew a --with-family flag that reproduces the earlier ten-declaration package (af908bb).

The pin then moved to Lean v4.35.0-rc3, the newest release that clears Palomar’s declared minimum of v4.35.0-rc2 while still letting the verifier derive its lean4export from the Lean version, checked with lake build, the axiom audit and the Comparator (047895a). Palomar requires its own complete reusable workflow at mode: full before a submission and does not accept a local build or a standalone Comparator run as equivalent, so a preflight workflow now calls it pinned to the same pipeline_commit (e61f71f) — where the second attempt at a clean submission stopped: called from this repository, that reusable workflow skips every verification step and reports only that the mechanical report was malformed, so the Comparator run was recorded separately from the pin (ea94db5) and the failure was filed upstream as PalomarRegistry/PalomarSubmission#154.