Crank author at a crank “institution” - I can’t assess whether the OpenAI paper is accurate but I highly doubt this is going to be the paper to disprove it.
University of Kansas is not a crank institution. So she directs a hybrid thinktank that's experience not anything crazy. Other physicists are citing her work: https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.00885 She's no hack.
Is this published in a serious peer review journal? The Arxiv has a very los publishing barrier.
She is submitting to serious peer reviewed journals. She has released preprints which she is subjecting to community scrutiny. Since the AI papers were released without peer review it was important to address and peer review as a community very quickly
From what I can tell it seems like they are probably wrong, but a mathematician publishing a paper about a well known unsolved problem in mathematics does not indicate they are a crank, even if their paper is wrong. This is a thing respected researchers in mathematics do.