Carlos Toledo · about

About

Independent exact certification of machine-generated mathematics — exact arithmetic, no code shared with the claimant, refusal as a verdict. You can disagree with a result on this site by running something, and the disagreement is then about the mathematics rather than about which of us is more credible.

the job

Narrow, and not solving

Take a numerical claim someone already believes — from a language model, from a published paper, or from my own draft — and either produce an interval that provably contains the true answer, together with the program that produced it, or report that the method did not reach one and stop there.

Much of the recent work is verification of machine-generated mathematics: AI-claimed results re-checked in independent arithmetic, each check first shown to fail on a deliberately broken copy of itself. The tools are interval arithmetic with outward rounding, exact rational arithmetic — BigInt on one side, standard-library fractions on the other — Sturm chains, and contraction arguments of the Krawczyk kind.

I work alone, from Brazil.

three lines of work

What the reports decide

the standard

Three things every page here owes you

what that does and does not buy

None of it makes the work correct. It makes it checkable, which is a weaker property and a more useful one.

outside the building

Where the work has gone, and what has come back

Everything here is self-published and self-checked, so the honest question is what happens when it leaves. The record, with the status words meant exactly: first what has come back (10 of 58), then everything else, newest first.

Status words mean exactly what they say and nothing more: public, no reply — visible to everyone, answered by nobody · filed, no reply — received by the other party's tracker, unanswered · posted, no reply — published where it was aimed, unanswered · open, no comments — an issue nobody has responded to · live, no reply — a comment visible in the thread, unanswered · posted, visibility unconfirmed — submitted, and we have not verified it appeared · submitted, awaiting moderation — in a queue, not yet visible · still in the moderation queue — submitted and confirmed not yet visible · answered — the other party replied in the thread; what came back is in the note · merged — accepted into the other party's repository. Last checked 18 October 2026.

Filed is not accepted; posted is not replied. One result on this site has been independently re-derived by a third party sharing no code (above); none has been peer-reviewed. That is the plain state of it, and it is why the pages ship their own falsifiers rather than asking for trust.

Traffic in the other direction has somewhere to go now: the claims desk takes a claim and answers it in public, whichever way it falls. 131 have been decided so far and 0 of those was sent by somebody else — a number this site publishes while it is still zero.

working together

What a collaboration or a hiring process can check

Open to collaboration — an independent audit of a release or a registry, a benchmark review, a certified decision product for an operation with a number to defend — and to roles in evaluation and verification. The four artifacts below were built to be re-run rather than read; every number in them is taken from a ledger at build time, and a number that stops holding refuses this page. The conventional CV is available on request.

absent by choice

What this page does not contain

No employment history, no degrees, no years-of-experience figure, no self-rated skills. Each of those is a claim a reader would have to take on trust, and putting them beside claims that can be re-run devalues the second kind. If a process needs a conventional CV, ask and you will get one.

method

How these pages are made, since it bears on how fast they appear

The mathematics, the design of every check, and the decision about what may be claimed are mine. The writing and much of the implementation are done with AI assistance, under the discipline this site describes: a screen may only prune, a gate counts only once it has been shown to go red on a broken copy, and every page recomputes its numbers from the records at build time — a build that drifts refuses to ship. The output rate is a consequence of that arrangement, and saying so seems better than letting a reader wonder.

The code and the checks on it share one author, so they rule out slips but not a shared misconception. An independent recomputation of any result here — in whatever you already trust — is the thing this site most wants, and a refutation gets published like any other result, with the name of whoever found it if they want it there.

contact

One address, for everything

carlos@carlostoledo.co — corrections, questions about a step, collaboration, hiring. A message that names the page and the one step it doubts can be answered properly; a general introduction usually cannot. For a hiring process, the section above is the checkable half of a CV; the conventional one on request.