3 ms·
A simple litmus test that saves you from most clickbait, si whether the actual paper title contains, more-or-less, the equation P=NP or P!=NP. I cite Andrew Wil
by leecarraher 7y ago
A simple litmus test that saves you from most clickbait, si whether the actual paper title contains, more-or-less, the equation P=NP or P!=NP. I cite Andrew Wile's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, titled "Modular Forms, Elliptic Curves and Galois Representations" . The title will be about the how, and not some pop article title.
- Ar-Curunir 7y agoOn as a counterexample, the paper showing that primality checking is in P was called "Primes is in P"
- dlubarov 7y agoAnother counterexample is "IP = PSPACE" by Shamir. I think it's nice when titles include the main result plus a few words about methodology, like "IP = PSPACE using Error Correcting Codes", or "The PCP Theorem by Gap Amplification".
- dagw 7y agoThe title "Modular Forms, Elliptic Curves and Galois Representations" was the title of his talk where he first presented his proof. He chose that title because he wanted to keep the fact the he'd actually proven FLT as a surprise twist for the end of his talk and did want and 'spoilers' The 'Modular Forms, Elliptic Curves..." part of the title comes from the fact that Wiles' approach wasn't to directly prove FLT. What he did was prove something called Taniyama–Shimura–Weil conjecture, which is a statement about the connections between modular forms and elliptic curves. It was already known at the time (thanks to Ribet's Theorem) that Taniyama–Shimura–Weil being true also would mean that FLT had to be true as a consequence of the conjecture.