5 ms·
Actually: https://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm https://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm And amusingly, the distribution of result is close to 5
by juhanima 11y ago
Actually: https://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm https://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm
And amusingly, the distribution of result is close to 50/50
- Kenji 11y agoThat's actually pretty cool. The difference is that here people are completely aware that this study does not in any way tell us whether P = NP (even if it was 100/0) as long as there's no solid proof on the table. A meta-analysis in those fields is usually only used to analyze the behaviour and methodology of researchers, not to investigate the ground truth of the papers.
- Retra 11y ago"The behaviour and methodology of researchers" is exactly that thing that will lead to the truths you seek. You're basically saying a bridge-builder needn't waste any time worrying about the engineering of boats.
- Kenji 11y agoWhile I admit it was wrong to claim that all meta-analysis is bad, the main point of my argument has not been refuted. You cannot inspect 100 papers and make a truth claim that is stronger than the quality of the papers, and doing so is a folly. Nobody in maths uses meta-analysis to prove a theorem.