What if an AI independently proves a long-open mathematical conjecture?
An AI independently proving a long-open conjecture validates reasoning-scaling and re-rates research-automation and humanoid names — NVDA/semis/Tesla lead on the productivity-and-robotics read, with a disinflationary tilt supporting broad equities. Rhymes with the May-2023 Nvidia AI-capex melt-up and the 2024 TSMC blowouts that lifted the whole complex. Forward angle: a single proof is a capability signal, not revenue, so the risk is a 'narrative pop' that fades like Feb-2025's DeepSeek scare unless monetization follows — the risk-on roots (ai_capex + robot_productivity) fit the framing.
how we built this number — every step
The class rate is measured from our dated, sourced event library (decade-normalized Poisson — the full table is public at base_rates.json). The variant’s share within its class is the analyst’s editorial call, published so you can audit it. A wider range means thinner precedent. Full recipe: methodology · scored at Reality Check.
The butterfly cascade
How this trigger trickles across markets, left → right — the root shock, its first‑order moves, then the ripple effects. Drag any node; tap a market for its real price history.
Resolution timeline — how this probability is moving
Our model's odds (gold) over time vs the crowd's (Polymarket, blue), from the past toward the 1–3 years horizon. Each dot is a real macro event that nudged the probability — green pushed it up, red pushed it down. Tap a dot for the source. The gold path is an illustrative reconstruction anchored to today's estimate — real dated events, not a live re-estimate history.
What it would mean
If this plays out, it is a risk-on shock. An AI system independently proves a long-open conjecture, validating reasoning scaling and lifting research-automation names. The trigger decomposes into signed root‑shocks — AI capex ▲ · Robotics productivity ▲ — which propagate through our causal graph to the markets below.
If it happens — the markets it would move
Biggest moves first. Projected moves are cascade-model priors; hist A–B% = what comparable past events actually did (measured abnormal returns), and model prior · unmeasured marks markets with no analogue backing yet. Tap any market for its price history.
| Market | Class | Projected move | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nvidia NVDAon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +2.9% hist -0.87–+5.62% · other way -3.19% (n=12) |
| 2 | Semiconductors SMHon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.7% hist +0.47–+1.41% · other way -0.28% (n=12) |
| 3 | Broadcom AVGOon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.7% hist -0.09–+2.53% · other way -0.43% (n=12) |
| 4 | Micron MUon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.6% hist -6.73–+2.31% · other way +0.87% (n=12) |
| 5 | Nasdaq 100 NDXon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Index | ▲ +1.2% hist +0.19–+0.8% · other way -1.07% (n=12) |
| 6 | AMD AMDon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.2% hist -2.19–+0.74% · other way -0.96% (n=12) |
| 7 | TSMC TSMon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.2% hist +0.23–+1.11% · other way -1.8% (n=12) |
| 8 | Marvell MRVLon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.2% hist +0.12–+0.7% · other way +0.5% (n=12) |
| 9 | ASML ASMLon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +1.0% hist -4.99–+0.64% · other way -2.54% (n=12) |
| 10 | Qualcomm QCOMon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +0.9% hist -3.34–+0.95% · other way -1.82% (n=12) |
| 11 | Tech sector XLK 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +0.9% hist +0.04–+0.4% · other way -0.7% (n=12) |
| 12 | Intel INTCon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +0.7% hist -3.92–+1.06% · other way -4.71% (n=12) |
| 13 | S&P 500 SPXon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Index | ▲ +0.5% hist -0.14–+2.09% · other way -1.13% (n=12) |
| 14 | 30y Treasury yield DGS30 📈 chart | Rate | ▼ -1bp hist -3.24–+5.16% · other way +5.6% (n=12) |
Probable recommendation
Why we may diverge from history
Trust the cascade LONG ASML/AMD: the -5% history is regime noise from 2024 NVDA/TSMC capex and Fed-repricing windows, not a clean read on a research-automation validation event.
Historical precedent — what analogous events actually did
Across 24 analogous events (overlap‑weighted), as abnormal returns — market beta stripped, so it's the event's own effect, not the market backdrop. Shown at 20 days (persistent) and 5 days (immediate); ↺ fades = the two horizons disagree. Confidence = consistency × sample × significance.
| Asset | History says | Abnormal (20d · 5d) | Hit | n | Confidence | vs cascade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASML ASML | SHORT | -4.2% · 5d -2.6% | 79% | 23 | 0.43 | ⚠ differs |
| SPX SPX | LONG | +1.6% · 5d +0.4% | 76% | 24 | 0.41 | ✓ matches cascade |
| INTC INTC | SHORT | -3.6% · 5d -3.5% | 68% | 24 | 0.35 | ⚠ differs |
| AMD AMD | SHORT | -2.2% · 5d -1.6% | 72% | 24 | 0.34 | ⚠ differs |
| Gold XAU | LONG | +1.8% · 5d +0.1% | 71% | 23 | 0.34 | · |
| QCOM QCOM | SHORT | -3.1% · 5d -2.2% | 71% | 23 | 0.30 | ⚠ differs |
| MU MU | SHORT | -6.5% · 5d -4.2% | 67% | 23 | 0.26 | ⚠ differs |
| XLK XLK | SHORT | -0.2% · 5d -0.4% | 67% | 23 | 0.24 | ⚠ differs |
| US dollar DXY | SHORT | -0.4% · 5d -0.3% | 64% | 24 | 0.23 | · |
| High-yield credit HYG | SHORT | -0.5% · 5d -0.0% | 65% | 22 | 0.22 | · |
| 10y yield DGS10 | LONG | +8bp · 5d +0bp | 60% | 24 | 0.16 | ⚠ differs |
| MRVL MRVL | SHORT | -0.3% · 5d -0.0% | 58% | 23 | 0.13 | ⚠ differs |
| AVGO AVGO | LONG | +1.5% · 5d -1.2% ↺ fades | 57% | 22 | 0.12 | ✓ matches cascade |
| TSM TSM | LONG | +0.4% · 5d -0.2% ↺ fades | 54% | 23 | 0.07 | ✓ matches cascade |
Why this probability
AI proving a long-open conjecture plausible by 2027-28 given reasoning gains; bounded but rising odds. A base‑rate‑anchored prior, continuously scored against what actually happens — not a forecast.