LLMs find existential conjectures easier to prove than universal "for all" conjectures
Not yet assessed. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.
Decomposition
This claim has not been assessed yet. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; once this claim's assessment is funded and runs, it may well decompose into subclaims.
Provenance
Where this claim has been said, linked to its canonical form.
I think that conjecture of the first kind are much easier for large language models to prove than conjectures of the second kind, since for the first kind, all the large language model needs to do is to find an example X satisfying the conditions
Madeleine Birchfield distinguishing existential from universal conjectures; Gowers later argues against this.
Cite this claim: a formal citation with its evidence attached
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.