State of Proof

Mathematical claim · candidate · examination not started

Frankl's Conjecture at Height Four and the Structure of Height-Five Counterexamples

Chenxiao Tian.

Source date: 2026-08-25 · Added: 2026-08-27 · Record updated:

Inclusion is not validation. This is an intake record and proposed check plan, not a completed examination or a peer-review decision. Any separate docket states its own exact source and scope.

Candidate · added · 2608.25147

A stubborn set puzzle loses another escape route

What it is
A paper claims to settle a bounded-height case of Frankl's union-closed-sets conjecture and constrain the next cases.
Who did it
Chenxiao Tian
What it could mean
Merge any two sets and get another allowed set. Must some item appear in half of them? This claim would settle a bounded class of that puzzle—not the general answer.

Examination not started

See the check plan

Evidence & validation

From announcement to evidence

Discovery recorded. State of Proof has not yet examined this claim.

  1. Read the original work

    Frankl's Conjecture at Height Four and the Structure of Height-Five Counterexamples ↗

    Chenxiao Tian.

  2. See the proposed checks

    Map the two formulations and reproduce the height-four case analysis; highest risk is a formulation/height shift being read as a result beyond the exact stated scope.

  3. No proof docket yet

    A docket is the public record of checks and open questions. This paper does not have one yet; the check plan above describes work still to do.

    Explore existing proof dockets →
How validation works →
What it claims
Proves the union-closed-sets conjecture for empty-set-free families of height at most four (equivalently usual families containing the empty set of height at most five), and constrains possible height-five counterexamples.
Why this could matter
A stubborn set puzzle loses another escape route The puzzle asks whether some item must appear in at least half the sets whenever combining any two stays inside the family. This paper settles height four and constrains the smallest height-five counterexamples; taller cases remain open.
If it holds up
Foundational: it settles height four and narrows the smallest height-five counterexamples, guiding the next search without resolving Frankl's conjecture in full.
If it does not
The height-four frontier reopens, but the broken step reveals which structural constraint cannot be trusted in future attacks.
Impact horizon
Foundational · Combinatorics · Set systems · Extremal structures
Version
submitted 2026-08-25 20:55:41 UTC.
Why we tracked it
a sharply limited new theorem plus structural constraints, not a full resolution.
Highest-risk dependency
a formulation/height shift being read as a result beyond the exact stated scope.
Available artifacts
New Slack discovery packet; no formal/code artifact listed.
Current boundary
Intake record only; examination not started.

Back to this paper in Paper Watch · Public records as JSON · Suggest a correction