3 ms·

https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547 https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547 Note it was actually Quasipolynomial time, not true polynomial time. It's also a pretty recen

https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547 https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547 Note it was actually Quasipolynomial time, not true polynomial time. It's also a pretty recent paper, so it could turn out to have flaws.

JadeNB 10y ago
> It's also a pretty recent paper, so it could turn out to have flaws. On the other hand, it's Babai, so it doesn't. :-)