Fix five citation keys in 15a.md that do not match the page's reference list - #141
Open
u00dxk2 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Fix five citation keys in 15a.md that do not match the page's reference list#141u00dxk2 wants to merge 1 commit into
u00dxk2 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
u00dxk2
added a commit
to u00dxk2/bounds-ledger
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2026
…lockers SENT: github.com/teorth/optimizationproblems/pull/141, open, one file, +6/-6, under David account, on his explicit "send it now". Preconditions re-run immediately before, not inherited: upstream HEAD == our mirror, all five mismatches live, zero open PRs touching 15a.md. Edit applied by a script that aborts unless each of six replacements matches exactly once, then asserts old keys absent / new keys present / line count unchanged. North star is STILL 0 - a sent PR is not an acknowledgement. FLIP ON HOLD, David: "let us not go public with the repository until the issues have been addressed." The whole-project review he asked for returned EIGHT blockers and "I would not flip public with this tree and history". The 8/03-8/04 package-complete claim is SUPERSEDED. Five artifact and package reviews missed all of this because each reviewed what we WROTE; none audited what the repository DISCLOSES. Verified by me rather than taken on the reviewer word: no LICENSE while we redistribute 111 mirrored files; health.json embeds an absolute local path; engineering-health doc publishes our own unprotected security posture; items.json publicly discloses the portfolio PII issue; author email in every commit; 15 commit bodies with private session URLs; and commit 228bd46 added a browser snapshot of erdosproblems.com containing third-party forum user handles. That last group matters for F-1: David accept-the-history ruling was about the MAINTAINER EMAIL only, on the reasoning the address was public. It was not given about session URLs, his own address, or third-party handles he had not seen. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
u00dxk2
added a commit
to u00dxk2/bounds-ledger
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
…lockers SENT: github.com/teorth/optimizationproblems/pull/141, open, one file, +6/-6, under David account, on his explicit "send it now". Preconditions re-run immediately before, not inherited: upstream HEAD == our mirror, all five mismatches live, zero open PRs touching 15a.md. Edit applied by a script that aborts unless each of six replacements matches exactly once, then asserts old keys absent / new keys present / line count unchanged. North star is STILL 0 - a sent PR is not an acknowledgement. FLIP ON HOLD, David: "let us not go public with the repository until the issues have been addressed." The whole-project review he asked for returned EIGHT blockers and "I would not flip public with this tree and history". The 8/03-8/04 package-complete claim is SUPERSEDED. Five artifact and package reviews missed all of this because each reviewed what we WROTE; none audited what the repository DISCLOSES. Verified by me rather than taken on the reviewer word: no LICENSE while we redistribute 111 mirrored files; health.json embeds an absolute local path; engineering-health doc publishes our own unprotected security posture; items.json publicly discloses the portfolio PII issue; author email in every commit; 15 commit bodies with private session URLs; and commit 293cec9 added a browser snapshot of erdosproblems.com containing third-party forum user handles. That last group matters for F-1: David accept-the-history ruling was about the MAINTAINER EMAIL only, on the reasoning the address was public. It was not given about session URLs, his own address, or third-party handles he had not seen. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The bounds table and comments on the matrix multiplication exponent page cite five keys that the page's own
## Referencessection does not define. Each has a near-identical entry under a different key, so no reference is missing. The table and the reference list just spell five of them differently, and a reader following a citation does not find it.[BCRL79][BCRL1979][L2014][LG2014][L2014][LG2014][DWZ23][DWZ2022][WXXZ24][VXXZ2023][ADWXXZ25][ADVXXZ2024]I have changed the table in four cases and the reference in one, following the convention in the page's own reference list: of its thirty definitions, all use four-digit years except
BCRL79; Le Gall isLG(LG2014,LG2017); and Vassilevska Williams isV(V2012,V2012a,V2014).L2014also collides withL2017, which is Landsberg. If you would rather keep the table spellings and change the five reference keys instead, I am happy to redo it that way.No bound, value, attribution, or reference target is changed, and no README cell is affected (none of these keys appears in README.md).
AI disclosure: an AI assistant was used to find these mismatches and prepare this patch. The references and proposed keys have been reviewed and verified by me.