Context: https://openai.com/index/building-scientific-understanding-with-academic-communities/
I'll resolve based on the consensus of the mathematical community at market close. For intuition (these are not binding rules, more like, rough guidelines):
If it's demonstrated to be incorrect before the close date, then this can resolve NO early.
If at market close there's no particular evidence to doubt its validity, by default resolves YES.
If there's substantial ongoing work to verify it, I will leave the market closed and wait to resolve until it doesn't seem like that work is still ongoing.
"Substantively correct" means that small, easily fixable errors are not sufficient for this to resolve NO. If much of the proof is correct but there's an error that requires substantial additional work to address, then it'd resolve NO.
This is a necessarily subjective resolution, so be aware of that before you trade! I won't bet myself.
1,000FWIW, I don't see why resolution wouldn't just follow "whatever the mathematicians verifying it conclude", but I want to leave the resolution more open ended in case there's disagreement.
@Ziddletwix relatedly: since they have promised to release info on their verification process, if at market close that group has not posted much, by default i'll probably assume "verification is still actively in progress" and leave the market closed for a bit (unless it seems like they're not actively working on it)