State of Proof

Mathematical claim · candidate · examination not started

A Counterexample to Belinsky's Conjecture on Cesàro Means at Lebesgue Points

Ushangi Goginava.

Source date: 2026-08-31 · Added: 2026-09-01 · 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 · 2608.30575

A long-standing Fourier averaging test may fail

What it is
The paper claims a counterexample showing a proposed condition cannot guarantee convergence for a Fourier-averaging process.
Who did it
Ushangi Goginava
What it could mean
Averaging is supposed to calm things down. This counterexample would show a proposed Fourier-averaging rule going wildly wrong even at a well-behaved point—a warning for the mathematics behind signal reconstruction.

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

    A Counterexample to Belinsky's Conjecture on Cesàro Means at Lebesgue Points ↗

    Ushangi Goginava.

  2. See the proposed checks

    Extract the proposed sequence and function; establish convexity, the growth bound, and the Lebesgue-point property independently; then reproduce the lower-bound/divergence estimate for the arithmetic means.

  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
The paper claims that the Carleson–Trigub–Zagorodniĭ logarithmic-growth condition is not sufficient for Belinsky's 1997 conjecture: it constructs a strictly convex increasing sequence ((am)) with (am≤ 7m⁸) and an (L¹(𝕋)) function for which the specified Cesàro means are unbounded at a Lebesgue point.
Why this could matter
A long-standing Fourier averaging test may fail Fourier averaging is a mathematical way to tame unstable wave reconstructions. This counterexample says a long-standing condition still cannot guarantee convergence at a locally well-behaved point; consequences for practical signal and image methods would be indirect and long-term.
If it holds up
Foundational: analysts must strengthen a proposed convergence test and gain a precise counterexample for building a correct replacement.
If it does not
The sufficiency claim may survive; the proposed sequence or function fails one of the required growth, convexity, or local-regularity conditions.
Impact horizon
Foundational · Harmonic analysis · Signal reconstruction · Convergence guarantees
Version
submitted 2026-08-31 10:48:49 UTC
Why we tracked it
fresh, narrowly stated refutation of the sufficiency direction of a named Fourier-analysis conjecture, but with no linked formal or computational replay artifact.
Highest-risk dependency
The construction must satisfy all three constraints simultaneously—strict convexity, the polynomial upper bound, and unbounded Cesàro behavior at the stated Lebesgue point. The abstract does not expose the quantitative estimate coupling them.
Available artifacts
arXiv supplies PDF, experimental HTML, and TeX source; no linked formal proof, code, data, or certificate repository was found.
Current boundary
Intake record only; examination not started.

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