3 ms·
From the author home page: 'It seems our algorithm is a polynomial one. So we would like to discuss with more people.' It's weird if a proof doesn't even conv
by mixedbit 13y ago
From the author home page:
'It seems our algorithm is a polynomial one. So we would like to discuss with more people.'
It's weird if a proof doesn't even convince the author.
https://sites.google.com/site/xinwenjiang/ https://sites.google.com/site/xinwenjiang/
- Filligree 13y agoIn this case, I think it shows uncommon good sense. There have been how many claims that P=NP? Ironically, the author being this careful makes me think he's more likely to be right.
- mcintyre1994 13y agoI'm not a specialist by any means, but he also ends the paper "All the results show that our polynomial time algorithm can get the same answer as the backtracking algorithm does. No exception.", which doesn't seem to imply a concrete proof.
- samolang 13y ago"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." - Donald Knuth
- devrelm 13y agoThis appears to be a corollary: "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only tried it, not proved it correct."