Talk:NP complexity class: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Schmitt (→Claimed proof: a 200000 dollar bet) |
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
::::Implications beyond mathematics: [http://cameronneylon.net/blog/p-%E2%89%A0-np-and-the-future-of-peer-review/ peer review] and [http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/nature-brain-and-culture/201008/p-np-and-is-academia-inhospitable-big-discoveries# research funding]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | ::::Implications beyond mathematics: [http://cameronneylon.net/blog/p-%E2%89%A0-np-and-the-future-of-peer-review/ peer review] and [http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/nature-brain-and-culture/201008/p-np-and-is-academia-inhospitable-big-discoveries# research funding]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::: Another interesting [http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=456 blog] post, essentially betting $ 200 000 that it is wrong. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | ::::: Another interesting [http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=456 blog] post, essentially betting $ 200 000 that it is wrong. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
::::::An [http://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/97587-a-tale-of-a-serious-attempt-at-p%E2%89%A0np/fulltext introduction to non-specialists] by [[Richard J. Lipton]], one of the specialists involved with verifying the proof. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:23, 17 August 2010
TODO:
- Add formal definitions for P, NP, reduction
- Add citations everywhere
- Make branch and bound section
- add disambiguation page for "NP" that links here
--Warren Schudy 23:55, 12 November 2007 (CST) Why does the subpages template produce that green notice about seeking approval? This article is far from that point!
- Don't worry, just a placeholder :) Aleksander Stos 12:41, 13 November 2007 (CST)
--Warren Schudy 11:50, 18 November 2007 (CST) I added a todo list at the top of the page. Please feel free to edit it.
--Warren Schudy 12:14, 18 November 2007 (CST) Wikipedia uses "NP (complexity)" for the title. Is that a better name?
Claimed proof
There's a claimed proof for P not equal to NP.
PDF at author's page: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Vinay_Deolalikar/ He says this is a preliminary version, actual paper is a few weeks away.
- Wow!!! Let us stay tuned; what else can I say? Boris Tsirelson 05:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- You were really fast to find this! You cannot expect us to already know if it is true, though. (If I remember correctly, there happened to be similar claims that turned out to be unfounded.) We are curious! --Peter Schmitt 09:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- An interesting and useful link [1]. --Peter Schmitt 23:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- A polymath wiki on this proof: [2] --Peter Schmitt 20:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Discussion [3] Sandy Harris 23:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Implications beyond mathematics: peer review and research funding. --Daniel Mietchen 23:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Another interesting blog post, essentially betting $ 200 000 that it is wrong. --Peter Schmitt 23:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- An introduction to non-specialists by Richard J. Lipton, one of the specialists involved with verifying the proof. --Daniel Mietchen 12:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)