Source authenticated

Normality of a sum of two Stoneham constants

Yes: the sum of two Stoneham constants sharing a base is normal in that base, for every admissible pair of parameters, with overlapping occurrences counted. Not to be confused with what the same 2012 paper proves: its Theorem 3 shows a sum of two $B$ -NONnormal Stoneham constants is $B$ -nonnormal, which concerns a different base and the opposite property. The open half was normality in the common defining base $b$ , and that is what this settles.

Exact FrontierDelta

Prior state unknown→proved

Scope and record

Occurred: Sep 10, 2026

Delta type: SOURCE CLAIM

Assumptions: VibeMathed verification: lean-verified. Publication: preprint. AI contribution: ai-discovered. VibeMathed editorial classifications, scores, notes, relations, and dataset structure are CC BY 4.0. Source statements and linked content retain their own rights.

Canonical aliases: Normality of a sum of two Stoneham constants · Normality of Stoneham Sum

Confidence: Not scored

Registry verification: lean verified · preprint · resolved

Open the source record ↗

Attribution

VibeMathed
registry · event recorded by

ChatGPT-6 Astra
model · ai model contributor · OpenAI

Evidence vector

SourceReplayReproducedFormal proofStatement auditExternal checkExpert reviewPeer review

Named evidence

VibeMathed record: Normality of a sum of two Stoneham constants

specialist registry · passed

Checked here on 12 September 2026 by reading the repository at commit f4d3d1f. Challenge.lean imports only Mathlib, writes the Stoneham series out in full, and states normality of the sum directly: for every length $l$ and every $j<b^{l}$ , the proportion of overlapping starting positions $n<M$ whose shifted fractional part lands in the half-open radix cylinder tends to $b^{-l}$ , under the coprimality hypotheses the paper asks for. Nothing project-defined appears in it. Solution.lean proves that exact proposition by unfolding definitions only, adding no analytic or normality assumption. Audit.lean pins the axiom lists of six declarations including the solution with #guard_msgs, so a changed list fails the build rather than printing a note, and GitHub Actions built from the pinned toolchain (Lean 4.34.0-rc2) and mathlib commit, ran that audit, and separately verified a sha256 fingerprint of the submitted statement - two green runs on 10 September. Unlike this author's xi-normality repository there is no comparator configuration, so there is no independent-kernel replay; the statement fingerprint covers statement tampering and Lean's own typechecking anchors the solution to the challenge. The build was not repeated here, and the correspondence to the 2012 paper was checked by reading Section 4 at source.