← Phase 2 / 25 · Chebotarev Referee Audit
Referee E's audit method is to independently recalculate the entire Chebotarev argument from scratch, not just double-checking the derivation steps of Document 16. The discriminant of $f_2(x)=x^3+x^2+8x-16$ is $-11136=-2^7\cdot3\cdot29$; irreducible plus a non-square discriminant gives $\operatorname{Gal}(L/\mathbf Q)=S_3$, and the unique quadratic subfield is $F_0=\mathbf Q(\sqrt{-174})$. Let $K=\mathbf Q(\zeta_{24},\sqrt{29})$, $[K:\mathbf Q]=16$; from $\sqrt{-174}=\sqrt{-6}\sqrt{29}$ and $\mathbf Q(\sqrt{-6})\subset\mathbf Q(\zeta_{24})$, we get $F_0\subset K$; because $K$ is abelian and the only nontrivial proper Galois subfield of $L$ is $F_0$, we have $L\cap K=F_0$, deducing $[LK:\mathbf Q]=48$. The support condition is expressed in a cleaner form: taking the identity on $K$ and a 3-cycle on $L$; the 3-cycle fixes $F_0$, so the two are compatible; the conjugacy class size is $2$, and the exact density is $\delta(\mathcal P)=2/48=1/24$—completely consistent with the independently calculated result in Document 16, the two calculations corroborating each other. Finally, the document confirms that v0.4 additionally ran a completely independent small polynomial-mod-$q$ verifier, scanning $q<10^7$, and once again explicitly states: this only verifies the implementation and density trend, and cannot replace the theorem itself.
Relationship with other documents, try to use the words from its own document, not my interpretation.
"This only verifies implementation and density trend, and does not replace the theorem." — Excerpt from the "Numerical sanity" paragraph in this text.
Loading...