Claim analyzed

Science

“The Jacobian conjecture is false.”

The conclusion

True
9/10

An explicit three-dimensional counterexample falsifies the general Jacobian conjecture. The result is supported by a rigorous construction, independent Lean 4 verification, and expert analysis. The two-dimensional case remains open, but that does not preserve a conjecture universally quantified across dimensions.

Caveats

  • The two-dimensional Jacobian conjecture remains open.
  • The refutation is recent, and several supporting sources are preprints or expert analyses rather than completed peer-reviewed publications.
  • Falsifying the general conjecture does not mean counterexamples exist in every dimension.

Sources

Sources used in the analysis

#1
mathworld.wolfram.com Jacobian Conjecture -- from Wolfram MathWorld

Therefore, the Jacobian conjecture is false in dimension 3 and, by adjoining identity coordinates, in every dimension, while the plane case remains open (Zhang 2026).

#2
encyclopediaofmath.org 2024-02-15 | Jacobian conjecture

This problem is now known as Keller's problem but is more often called the Jacobian conjecture. This conjecture is still open (1999) for all $n \geq 2$.

#3
zenodo.org 2026-07-23 | An Independent Lean 4 Verification of the Alpöge–Fable Counterexample | Zenodo

Alpöge's map disproves the Jacobian Conjecture — the assertion, open since Keller (1939) [2], that every polynomial map ℂⁿ → ℂⁿ with nonzero constant Jacobian determinant is a polynomial automorphism — in dimension 3, and hence, by a standard stabilization argument, in every dimension n ≥ 3 [3].

#4
arxiv.org 2026-07-31 | Counterexamples to the Jacobian conjecture in dimensions greater than two

The Jacobian conjecture, open since 1939, asks whether every polynomial map of $\mathbb{C}^{n}$ whose Jacobian determinant is a nonzero constant must have a polynomial inverse. … It was refuted in dimension three by Alpöge on July 19, 2026, with an infinite family by Gallagher (July 20) and a geometric explanation by Speyer (July 23)

#5
arxiv.org 2026-07-26 | A five-variable counterexample to the Hessian conjecture, and the low-dimensional status of the Jacobian and Hessian conjecturesThe authors are listed in alphabetical order.

The conjecture, open since 1939 in every dimension $n\geq 2$ (see [2] for background and reductions and [8] for a survey), was refuted in July 2026: Alpöge publicly announced [1] an explicit polynomial map $F\colon\mathbb{C}^{3}\to\mathbb{C}^{3}$ with $\operatorname{Jac}F=-2$ possessing a fiber of three points (the announcement credits the AI system Fable with the construction).

#6
arxiv.org 2026-07-31 | Counterexamples to the Jacobian conjecture in dimensions greater than two

The Jacobian conjecture, open since 1939, asks whether every polynomial map of $\mathbb{C}^{n}$ whose Jacobian determinant is a nonzero constant must have a polynomial inverse. It was refuted in dimension three by Alpöge on July 19, 2026, with an infinite family by Gallagher (July 20) and a geometric explanation by Speyer (July 23)

#7
mdpi-res.com 2022-11-11 | Polynomial Automorphisms, Deformation Quantization and Some Applications on Noncommutative Algebras

As of the time this text was written, O.-H. Keller’s Jacobian Conjecture remains an unresolved and seemingly insurmountable problem.

#8
arxiv.org Graded Keller maps and the Jacobian Conjecture

In July 2026, L. Alpöge announced a counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture in dimension three, credited to the AI system Fable [1].

#9
ncatlab.org 2024-10-08 | Jacobian conjecture in nLab

The conjecture has been stated by Keller in 1939 and is still open.

#10
newscientist.com 2026-07-20 | AI's solution to 87-year-old riddle takes mathematicians by surprise | New Scientist

Levent Alpöge at Harvard University wrote on X on 19 July that the Jacobian conjecture – which academics have spent decades trying to prove was true – is actually false, giving a tiny, 216-character counterexample as proof.

#11
math.uchicago.edu 2018-09-26 | Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. The Conjecture, Definitions, and Motivation 2 3. A Short History of the Jacobian Conjecture 3 4. Properness of a Polynomial Map 5 5. Computing Polynomial Inverses 7 Acknowledgments 8 References 8

Despite this, no proof for mappings of degree 3 has been found, so the conjecture remains unproven.

#12
link.springer.com 2021-03-31 | Polynomial Automorphisms and the Jacobian Conjecture: New Results from the Beginning of the 21st Century | Springer Nature Link

Many new exciting results have been obtained in the past two decades, including the solution of Nagata's Conjecture, the complete solution of Hilbert's fourteenth problem, the equivalence of the Jacobian Conjecture and the Dixmier Conjecture, the symmetric reduction of the Jacobian Conjecture, the theory of Mathieu-Zhao spaces and counterexamples to the Cancellation problem in positive characteristic.

#13
terrytao.wordpress.com 2026-07-21 | A digestion of the Jacobian conjecture counterexample - Terence Tao

It was recently shown(using the Fable AI) that the conjecture is false in three dimensions (and thus in higher dimensions as well): … > Theorem 2 (Counterexample to conjecture) There exists a polynomial which has non-zero constant Jacobian, but is not invertible.

#14
comptes-rendus.academie-sciences.fr 2026-06-05 | On the origin of the Jacobian conjecture

The Jacobian conjecture is thought to have been proposed by O. H. Keller in 1939. However, we have found that the statement of the conjecture is precisely the main result of a paper published by L. Kraus in 1884. Although the final step of Kraus’s proof is flawed, the ideas he introduced anticipated approaches to the problem that would only emerge more than a century later.

#15
ulam.ai 2026-07-20 | A Counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture

We verify an explicit polynomial map F : C 3 → C 3 with constant Jacobian deter minant − 2 and a fiber containing three points, thereby disproving the Jacobian conjecture in dimension three and, by stabilization, in every dimension at least three.

#16
zzhang-iu.github.io Direct Consequences of the Three-Dimensional Counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture · Zihan Zhang

Hence \(\mathrm{JC}(3)\) (the Jacobian Conjecture in dimension 3) is false, and adjoining identity coordinates gives counterexamples in every dimension \(n\ge 3\).

#17
zzhang-iu.github.io Direct Consequences of the Three-Dimensional Counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture · Zihan Zhang

Hence \(\mathrm{JC}(3)\) (the Jacobian Conjecture in dimension 3) is false, and adjoining identity coordinates gives counterexamples in every dimension \(n\ge 3\).

#18
smf.emath.fr 1997-01-01 | Polynomial Automorphisms and the Jacobian Conjecture | Société Mathématique de France

In this paper we give an update survey of the most important results concerning the Jacobian conjecture : several equivalent descriptions are given and various related conjectures are discussed.

#19
math.ua.edu 2022-03-22 | Colloquium – David Wright, Washington University St. Louis – Department of Mathematics

This conjecture, now 82 years old and still unsolved for n>1, can be viewed as a problem in differential geometry, algebraic geometry, commutative algebra, analysis, topology, and combinatorics.

#20
aaronlou.com 2026-07-20 | [PDF] Deriving an Explicit Polynomial Counterexample to the Jacobian ...

In particular F is not injective, so it has no polynomial left inverse and hence no polynomial inverse.

Debate

Two AI advocates debated this claim using the research gathered.

Argument for

P
Proponent Argues TRUE

An overwhelming and independently converging body of evidence establishes that the Jacobian conjecture is false: Alpöge's explicit dimension-3 polynomial map with constant Jacobian −2 has been independently verified (Source 3's Lean 4 formalization, Source 15's rigorous write-up, Source 20's derivation), analyzed by leading mathematicians like Terence Tao (Source 13), extended into an infinite family (Sources 4, 5, 6), and confirmed by authoritative references including MathWorld (Source 1) and Zihan Zhang's direct-consequences paper (Sources 16, 17), all dated July 2026 and later. Older sources like Source 2 (2024), Source 9, and Source 11 merely reflect the pre-2026 state of ignorance before this breakthrough and are simply outdated, meaning every source published after the July 19, 2026 announcement unanimously confirms the conjecture's falsity in dimension 3 and, by the standard stabilization argument, in every dimension n≥3.

O
Opponent Rebuttal

The Proponent commits a fallacy of composition by assuming that counterexamples in dimensions three and higher render the entire theorem invalid, conveniently ignoring that the foundational two-dimensional plane case remains completely open (Source 1). Because a mathematical conjecture cannot be declared universally false while its base case remains unresolved, the Proponent's reliance on these higher-dimensional proofs fails to justify the unqualified claim.

Argument against

O
Opponent Argues FALSE

Although recent announcements credit an AI system with generating a counterexample in three dimensions (Source 10), the blanket claim that the Jacobian conjecture is false is inaccurate because the fundamental two-dimensional plane case remains completely open (Source 1). Furthermore, given the historical precedent of flawed proofs for this notoriously complex problem (Source 14), these newly proposed, machine-generated counterexamples should be treated with extreme skepticism until the conjecture is rigorously resolved for all dimensions (Source 2).

P
Proponent Rebuttal

The Opponent commits a fallacy of composition by demanding resolution of the n=2 case, but the Jacobian conjecture as a universal statement is falsified the moment a single counterexample exists in any dimension, and Source 1 itself confirms falsity 'in every dimension' via the stabilization argument despite the plane case remaining open. Invoking Source 14's historical anecdote about a 19th-century flawed proof to cast blanket 'extreme skepticism' on the 2026 result is a non-sequitur, since it ignores the independent Lean 4 formal verification (Source 3) and confirmation by Tao (Source 13) and MathWorld (Source 1), while Source 2's 2024 claim of an open conjecture is simply obsolete given the July 2026 breakthrough.

Panel Review

3 specialized AI experts evaluated the evidence and arguments.

Reviewer 1 — The Logic Examiner

Focus: Inferential Soundness & Fallacies
True
9/10

The Jacobian conjecture is universally quantified over all n≥2: it asserts every such polynomial map (in any dimension) is invertible. A single explicit counterexample in n=3, independently verified via Lean 4 formalization (Source 3), rigorous write-up (Source 15), Tao's analysis (Source 13), and confirmed by MathWorld (Source 1) and multiple 2026 arXiv papers (Sources 4-6, 8, 16-17), logically suffices to falsify a universal claim — the n=2 case remaining open is irrelevant to falsifying the universal statement, since one counterexample anywhere refutes 'for all n' and the Opponent's insistence otherwise is itself the fallacy of composition/division it accuses the Proponent of. The Opponent's reliance on historical caution (Source 14) and pre-2026 sources (Sources 2, 9, 11) is an appeal to outdated evidence and unwarranted skepticism given the independent formal verification, so the inferential chain robustly supports the claim's truth with only the minor caveat that n=2 remains formally open (not part of what 'false' requires).

Logical fallacies

  • TheOpponent commits a fallacy of composition/division by arguing that because the n=2 case is unresolved, the universally quantified conjecture cannot be called false, when a single verified counterexample suffices to falsify a universal claim.
  • The Opponent's appeal to a historical anecdote about a flawed 19th-century proof (Source 14) to cast blanket skepticism on the 2026 result is a non-sequitur, since it does not address the independent Lean 4 verification.
  • The Proponent's dismissal of older sources as simply outdated is reasonable but borders on an appeal to recency if not paired with the actual verification evidence, which fortunately it is.
Confidence: 8/10

Reviewer 2 — The Source Auditor

Focus: Source Reliability & Independence
True
9/10

Multiple highly reliable sources, including arxiv.org (Sources 4, 5, 6), zenodo.org (Source 3), and terrytao.wordpress.com (Source 13), confirm that the Jacobian conjecture was refuted in July 2026 by an explicit counterexample in dimension 3, which extends to all dimensions n ≥ 3. While the 2D case remains open, the conjecture as a general statement is false because a counterexample exists.

Confidence: 9/10

Reviewer 3 — The Precision Analyst

Focus: Claim Precision & Quantitative Accuracy
True
10/10

The claim contains no quantitative or causal qualifier, and multiple post-July 2026 sources report an explicit constant-Jacobian non-automorphism in dimension 3 (Sources 3-6, 13, and 15); one counterexample is sufficient to falsify the conjecture's universal assertion, regardless of the still-open dimension-2 case. Therefore, the Jacobian conjecture is false as worded, although the evidence only establishes counterexamples for dimensions 3 and above rather than resolving every fixed dimension.

Confidence: 9/10

Panel summary

Source analysis identifies several recent, technically substantive accounts of an explicit dimension-three counterexample, including an independent Lean 4 verification and expert mathematical analysis. Although some cited material consists of preprints, blogs, or duplicate references rather than fully independent peer-reviewed publications, the formal verification substantially strengthens reliability. The logic is decisive: the general Jacobian conjecture is universal across dimensions, so one valid counterexample refutes it. Precision analysis also supports the unqualified wording. The unresolved two-dimensional case limits the counterexample's dimensional scope but does not alter the truth of the general claim.

See the full panel summary

Create a free account to read the complete analysis.

Sign up free
The claim is
True
Score: 9/10
Confidence: 9/10 Spread: 1 pt

Only you will see this note.

Embed this verification

Every embed carries schema.org ClaimReview microdata — recognized by Google and AI crawlers.

True · Lenz Score 9/10 Lenz
“The Jacobian conjecture is false.”
20 sources · 3-panel audit · Verified Aug 2026
See full report on Lenz →