From what I can understand, Deolalikar’s main innovation seems to be to use some concepts from statistical physics and finite model theory and tie them to the . It was my understanding that Terence Tao felt that there was no hope of recovery: “To give a (somewhat artificial) analogy: as I see it now, the paper is like a. Deolalikar has constructed a vocabulary V which apparently obeys the following properties: Satisfiability of a k-CNF formula can.
|Published (Last):||4 November 2018|
|PDF File Size:||17.86 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.93 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
I have followed Terence Tao ‘s blog and Tim Gowersboth of whom have reservations, but Deolalikar is sticking with his assertions deoalikar was supposedly preparing an updated response to the critics. I haven’t seen anything much since posts in August. Is anyone aware of any new updates more recent than Sept?
The FO LFP objections are like a discovery of serious wiring faults in the engine, but the inventor then claims that one can easily fix this by replacing the engine with another, slightly less sophisticated engine. The XORSAT and solution space objections are like a discovery that, according to the blueprints, the car would run just as well deolqlikar the gasoline fuel was replaced with ordinary tap water.
Even though Deolalikar’s paper was the most seriously considered recently, and a lot of work was put into it by important people in the few weeks after it came out, but very little public judgement since then. There were enough reservations that people probably won’t bother looking at it again until the update comes out.
Deolalikar Responds To Issues About His P≠NP Proof | Gödel’s Lost Letter and P=NP
Here’s the status of the paper: It was my understanding that Terence Tao felt that there was no hope of recovery: Mitch 6, 25 Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. prolf
Fatal Flaws in Deolalikar’s Proof?