Back to search
2212.01929

An Extremal Property of the Square Lattice

Paige Helms

wronghigh confidenceCounterexample detected
Category
math.DS
Journal tier
Specialist/Solid
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s Theorem 1 asserts, for each fixed ring Ar at radius r around the deep hole p in Z^2, a lower bound ∑_{δ∈Cr} ||p−δ|| − ∑_{z∈Ar} ||p−z|| ≥ r |Ar| d(Δ,Z^2)^2, and an analogous bound for convex φ, with d defined by d(Δ,Z^2)=sqrt(||v−v'||^2+||w−w'||^2) (equivalent up to constants for other norms) . For the unimodular shear v'=v, w'=w+sv (det=1), taking the first nonempty ring r=√(1/2) with Ar of size 4, one computes explicitly that the LHS equals r s^2 + o(s^2) as s→0, while the RHS equals 4 r s^2, contradicting the claimed inequality for all sufficiently small s≠0. Since φ(x)=x is permitted, the convex-φ statement reduces to the same false claim. The definitions of Ar and Cr, and the setup, match the paper’s notation . Therefore, the model’s counterexample is valid and Theorem 1 (linear-distance and convex cases) is false as stated.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} reject

\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid

\textbf{Justification:}

The main theorem’s linear-distance and convex-function bounds, with explicit factor r·|A\_r|·d(Δ,Z\^2)\^2, are falsified by a simple unimodular shear at the first nontrivial ring. The squared-distance part may still contain correct local minimality insights, but the claimed quantitative bounds for linear distances and convex φ are not valid as stated. Substantial revision is required to correct the constants and/or add assumptions preventing the exhibited failure.