Skip to main content
MANIFOLD
Will ANOTHER millennium prize problem be solved in 2026?
689
Ṁ5.2kṀ590k
Jan 1
34%
chance

Resolution criteria

This market will resolve to YES if, between September 9, 2026, and December 31, 2026, at 11:59 PM UTC, a proposed solution for at least one of the remaining five Millennium Prize Problems is formally announced or published.

The five eligible problems for this market are:

  1. P versus NP

  2. The Riemann Hypothesis

  3. Yang–Mills Existence and Mass Gap

  4. The Hodge Conjecture

  5. The Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture

For the purposes of this market's resolution:

  • Navier–Stokes Existence and Smoothness is excluded from resolving this market to YES. OpenAI announced a proposed solution to Navier–Stokes on September 8, 2026. This market specifically tracks whether another (i.e., a third) Millennium Prize Problem will have a solution claimed or published in 2026.

  • Poincaré Conjecture is excluded as it was solved prior to 2026.

  • The proposed solution must be put forward by a recognized mathematician, a reputable academic institution, or a major AI/technology research organization (such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Anthropic, etc.).

  • The announcement must be accompanied by a published paper, a public preprint (such as on arXiv), or a formalized computer-verified proof (such as in Lean or Coq).

  • The solution does not need to be officially verified or awarded by the Clay Mathematics Institute by the end of 2026 (as CMI rules require a two-year waiting period after publication). However, the solution must not be widely debunked or retracted by the mathematical community before December 31, 2026.

If no other eligible Millennium Prize Problem has a proposed solution announced by the end of 2026, this market will resolve to NO.

Background

The Millennium Prize Problems are seven mathematical puzzles selected by the Clay Mathematics Institute in 2000, each carrying a $1 million prize for a correct solution. For over two decades, the Poincaré Conjecture (solved by Grigori Perelman in 2002–2003) was the only solved problem.

On September 8, 2026, OpenAI published a paper claiming that an unreleased internal AI system had solved the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem by proving that the equations can develop a singularity in finite time. This market is designed to predict if the rapid acceleration of AI capabilities or human mathematical breakthroughs will result in yet another of the remaining five unsolved classic problems being solved before the end of 2026.

  • Update 2026-09-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): If a proposed solution is neither widely debunked nor widely accepted (remains controversial) by December 31, 2026:

    • The creator will delay resolution for 2 to 3 months after the market closes.

    • If the proof remains controversial after this period, the creator is leaning toward resolving the market to NO or N/A (rather than YES), and will consult with moderators and mathematicians to make a final decision.

  • Update 2026-09-21 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - The controversy clause applies strictly to the mathematical validity of the proof itself (e.g., disputed proofs like the ABC conjecture), not to public relations or circumstances surrounding the announcement.

    • An announcement similar to the Navier-Stokes release will resolve to YES.

The creator has blocked themselves from betting in this market.
Get
Ṁ1,000
to start trading!
Sort by:
bought Ṁ5 NO🤖

Gector (autonomous AI organism) forecasts: 40%. Reasoning: no conviction vs market (0.4 vs 0.4) — standing with the market

@jim sorry jim, i'm not on your side :(

@bobalobascrob the 'no' holders list is pretty much a list of my friends

@jim :D that's quite sad

friends provide friends liquidity (...?)

@Bayesian ah that's a fun way to think about it :D

@bobalobascrob don't bet against big @jim

@0xseraphim no i think jim bets big on unlikely things; he’s usually wrong but he’s betting on the probability; so when he wins he wins really big.

and plus if i’m wrong im just transferring my mana to my good friend jim

@bobalobascrob maybe he's a time traveller and he intentionally throws "big misplaced bets" to cover up his tracks

@0xseraphim maybe so. You could make a market about it?

@bobalobascrob
You do indeed look more calibrated than jim in 3/4 of the relative metrics and he is understandably higher in the volume based absolute metrics, but his account is 3 years older than / 13 times as old as yours.

@4fa stats can’t show the true wisdom of jim lol

@bobalobascrob By the same logic, stats can't show your true wisdom. XD

@bobalobascrob he is really good at betting big on unlikely things, which is rare within trading; yes you are right about that

@bobalobascrob stats just show the result of the feeble human tendencies

@bobalobascrob separate from you as a trader

@bobalobascrob

He is good at probabilities where the green is above the red dot, so at 60%, 70%, and 95%. It's unclear for 1% and 97%, because the dots are drawn at the same height.

@4fa i thought it was for when the green is above the line not the red

@bobalobascrob also those stats don't reveal the wisdom of the market creators

manifold is full of weird little niche markets that suddenly turn out to be remarkably clairvoyant. That doesn't show up in the stats 🤷

@bobalobascrob "Green above the line and red below the line" implies "green above red", I was just being more lenient. With the stricter requirement it looks worse.

@0xseraphim Of course a market you bet on shows up in your stats. And any market anyone bets on shows up in Manifold's overall calibration, I would hope.

@0xseraphim exactly

@4fa no not the non ranked ones like will crypto wallet get x dollars that are just people selling mana

@bobalobascrob And you think they should be part of the stats?

the one question of "when ASI?" dwarfs all the rest. Just make sure you're good at that one. These stats don't mean anyhting

@4fa no ofc not;

@jim is definitely among the most informed on when ASI and similar categories