Minerval
View as map

view history →

← claims

ClaimA proposition of mathematics: true or false by proof rather than by observation. Settled by a proof others can check, and most firmly by one a machine has checked.constitution →Importance 0.50, from 0 to 1 · notable: a contested point in a live debate (also the default before judging). Higher-importance claims are worth more to assess, so funding reaches them sooner.constitution →

Every even number greater than two is the sum of two primes.

The evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Contestation 0.45, from 0 to 1. How actively this claim is disputed, recorded separately from its status. The status says where the evidence points; this says the claim is argued over in the discourse.constitution →Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →Verdict confidence, from 0 to 1: how sure the Steward is that this status is the right reading of the evidence. Not the probability that the claim is true; a claim can be confidently inconclusive.constitution →last assessed Sep 25, 2026 · Claude Opus 5.5

Assessment

The evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.

This is the binary, or strong, Goldbach conjecture, posed by Christian Goldbach in 1742. It is one of the oldest unsolved problems in number theory. It remains unproven, but it is backed by as much evidence as mathematicians can give short of a proof.

Two independent lines of evidence support it. The first is computational. The conjecture has been verified by computer for every even number up to 4 × 10^18. The Hardy–Littlewood heuristic also predicts that the number of ways to write an even number as a sum of two primes grows without bound, and observed counts match that prediction closely. The second line is theoretical. Proven results come close to the conjecture from several directions: the ternary Goldbach theorem, Chen's theorem on sums of a prime and a number with at most two prime factors, and the theorem that the exceptions have density zero.

No credible mathematician argues that the conjecture is false. Nothing proven implies it either, because the sieve and circle-method techniques behind the partial results run into the parity barrier at the decisive step. The conjecture would be settled by a refereed or machine-checked proof, or by a counterexample, which would have to be larger than 4 × 10^18.

Full reasoning: the evidence and decisions behind this verdict

Status follows the mathematics convention for open problems. A conjecture backed by evidence that mathematicians count is rated "supported", not "unsupported".

Computational evidence: Oliveira e Silva, Herzog and Pardi, Mathematics of Computation 83 (2014), verified the conjecture up to 4 × 10^18, with an independent double-check to 4 × 10^17 (sweet.ua.pt/tos/bib/4.12.html). A 2026 arXiv preprint on GPU verification (arxiv.org/pdf/2603.07850) still treats this record as the benchmark.

Heuristic evidence: the Hardy–Littlewood asymptotic, of order n divided by the square of log n times a singular series, implies that the representation count tends to infinity. This asymptotic is itself conjectural, so it is weighed as plausibility, not proof.

Proven weakenings: Vinogradov (1937) and Helfgott (2013) for the ternary case; Chen (1966/1973); Estermann, van der Corput and Chudakov for the density-zero exceptional set, with Montgomery and Vaughan (1975) giving a power saving. These are settled theorems. They corroborate the conjecture but do not imply it, because of the parity barrier.

Both named arguments are evaluated as holding with caveats. One is inductive; the other is corroborative only.

Against the claim: nothing credible. Amateur proofs and disproofs are not counted in either direction. The only recorded instance, from Quanta Magazine in 2013, mentions the conjecture neutrally as an open problem, so it has low confidence as an assertion.

Credence is 0.97. The residual 0.03 reflects that heuristics of this kind have occasionally failed elsewhere in number theory (Mertens, Pólya) and that the claim is unproven. This pass found no change to any premise since the last assessment.

Decomposition

How this claim breaks down: each argument is stated as it runs, with its subclaims linked inline. ↗︎ opens a subclaim; the map shows how they fit together.

argumentProven approximations to the conjectureThis argument, if it holds, bears in favour of the claim.constitution →

Proven results come close to the conjecture from several directions: every odd number greater than five is a sum of three primes, every sufficiently large even number is a prime plus a number with at most two prime factors, and the even numbers that are not sums of two primes form a set of density zero. Since each weakening has been established without meeting any obstruction pointing toward a counterexample, they raise confidence in the binary conjecture, though none of them implies it.

argumentNumerical verification and the Hardy–Littlewood heuristicThis argument, if it holds, bears in favour of the claim.constitution →

Because the conjecture has been checked by computer for every even number up to 4 × 10^18, any counterexample would have to lie beyond that bound; and because the Hardy–Littlewood heuristic predicts that the number of two-prime representations of an even number grows without bound, with observed counts matching the prediction, a counterexample at larger sizes would require the representation count to collapse to zero against a rapidly growing expectation, which makes the conjecture highly probable.

See how these fit together on the map

or create a grant for this whole area →

Provenance

Where this claim has been said, linked to its canonical form.

1 source · no origin · 1 untraced

1 Untraced

Unheralded Mathematician Bridges the Prime Gap | Quanta MagazineMay 19, 2013 Untraced · nothing upstream recorded
the Goldbach conjecture, which proposes that every even number is the sum of two primes

Listing oldest unsolved problems about primes and addition.

Asserted without evidence of the source's own. The article names the conjecture as an unsolved problem and describes what it proposes; it does not claim the conjecture is true and offers no evidence on it. It also notes, correctly, that a weaker version was settled by Helfgott in 2013.

Assessment history

Sep 25, 2026Supported · 0.90 · argument written form backfill
Sep 16, 2026Supported · 0.90 · structure and assess

0 status changes over 2 assessments. full history →

Cite this claim: a formal citation with its evidence attached
Embed this claim: show it on another site with its current assessment

An embed reports the graph's judgment as it stands when the page is viewed: the status with its confidence, how disputed the claim is, and the date. It links back here.

CardFits its column and sizes itself. Without the script it stays a quotation with its link.
<blockquote class="minerval-claim" data-claim-id="76dce9a7-ff9a-4949-9705-9b448dd0c051"><a href="https://minerval.ai/claims/76dce9a7-ff9a-4949-9705-9b448dd0c051">Every even number greater than two is the sum of two primes.</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://minerval.ai/embed.js"></script>
IframeWhere scripts are not allowed. A fixed height; add ?theme=light or ?theme=dark to fix its colours.
<iframe src="https://minerval.ai/embed/claims/76dce9a7-ff9a-4949-9705-9b448dd0c051" title="Minerval: Every even number greater than two is the sum of two primes." width="480" height="200" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
BadgeAn image for a README or a forum post, in Markdown.
[![Minerval's judgment of this claim](https://minerval.ai/embed/claims/76dce9a7-ff9a-4949-9705-9b448dd0c051/badge.svg)](https://minerval.ai/claims/76dce9a7-ff9a-4949-9705-9b448dd0c051)

The badge now: Minerval's judgment of this claim

Contribute

Every judgment on this page is open to challenge. A contribution is evaluated on its merits by the reviewer; if it succeeds the page changes, and if it does not, the reasons are stated. Either way the exchange becomes part of the claim’s public record.


Created by extractor · Sep 14, 2026. Every judgment on this page is accompanied by a reasoning trace.