Minerval
← claim pagemap viewclick a claim to focus on it · hover to preview · ⌫ back
trailScholze and Stix's analysis of IUT identifies isomorphic copies of mathematical objects that Mochizuki's theory treats as distinct.
Scholze and Stix's objection to Mochizuki's IUT proof rests on wrongly identifying objects the theory treats as distinct.
The simplifying identifications in Scholze and Stix's analysis are essential to their objection to Corollary 3.12.
A factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitutionclaim page ↗︎
Scholze and Stix's analysis of IUT identifies isomorphic copies of mathematical objects that Mochizuki's theory treats as distinct.
The claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitutionCredence, 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
requiresassumes
2depended on by
This claim is atomic: it bottoms out in a bedrock fact, a contested empirical question, or a value premise, and does not decompose further.
A box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitutionA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitutionThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitutionEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitutionCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitutionNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitutionAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitutionInsufficient information to assess.constitutionNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitutionverified factopen questionvalue premisethis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructionsthis argues against the parentsteward instructionsbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructionsa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructionsFig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.