Possible fatal flaws in the finite model part of deolalikars proof neil immerman is one of the worlds experts on finite model theory. One of the main fora for this has been the blog of richard lipton that brandon has. Hp labs vinay deolalikar proposes proof on p not equal. Np is proved, then to whatever extent theoretical computer science continues to exist at all, it will have a very different character. Manuscript sent on 6th august to several leading researchers in various areas. Yesterday, a paper was published concerning the conjunctive boolean satisfiability problem, which asks whether a given list of logical statements contradict each other or not. Of the many prominent mathematicians who have expressed doubts about the claimed p np proof of hp researcher vinay deolalikar, few are more entitled to. So when vinay deolalikar, a computer scientist at hewlett packard labs in india, sent an email on august 7, 2010, to a few top researchers claiming that p doesnt equal np thereby answering this question in the negative and staking a claim on the milliondollar millennium prize. Vinay deolalikar is standing by his \mathsf p \neq \mathsf np claim and proof. Vinay deolalikar, a mathematician and electrical engineer at hewlettpackard, posted a proposed proof of what is known as the p versus np problem on a. P np hype, dave bacon, the quantum pontiff, august 10 2010. P, np, and is academia inhospitable to big discoveries. Jul 30, 2019 deolalikar responds to issues about his p.
It asks whether every problem whose solution can be quickly verified can also be. It asks whether every problem whose solution can be quickly verified can also be solved quickly. After all, one would simply have to choose the natural number n so large that when the machine does not deliver a result, it makes no sense to think more about the problem. Vinay deolalikar of hewlettpackard labs in palo alto, california, has released a draft paper titled simply p. Lo0212046, we establish in the context of infinite time turing machines that p. This paper is still a draft, and in a very preliminary form. Vinay happens to be a graduate of the university of southern california. If, on the other hand p np, the consequences would be even more stunning, since every one of these problems would have a polynomial time. So no proof of p vs np can work by looking at the structure of solution spaces. Np, richard lipton and ken regan, godels lost letter and pnp, august 10 2010. I have no idea either, and the rest of the document just gets more confusing for a nonmathematician. Vinay deolalikar is a principal research scientist at hp labs who has done important research in various areas of networks.
Now, its the slow roasting of an hp mathematician forbes. Vinay deolalikar, a principal research scientist at hp labs, claims to have definitively proved that p. In subsequent years, many problems central to diverse areas of application were shown to be np complete see gj79 for a list. Lance fortnow georgia institute of technology a personal view. Shtetloptimized blog archive eight signs a claimed p.
Nonetheless the online maths community has lit up with excitement as this document, claiming to prove one of the major outstanding theorems in maths circulated. Is p, which is known to be a subset of np, a proper subset. Vinay deolalikar who also works in the hp labs now claims to have solved the problem. These versions differ in their definition of input length. More precisely, the p versus np problem is shown to be a scientific rather than a mathematical problem. If deolalikar was right, he had cut one of mathematics. Despite the fact that the paper is by a respected researcher hp labs vinay deolalikar and not a crank, my bet is that the proof is flawed edited to add 816. Were the p is not equal to np proof claimer, vinay deolalikar, a good boy of academia, he would have spent his time applying for funding to apply computer science principles to, say, military or. A few days ago, vinay deolalikar of hp labs started circulating a claimed proof of p. Deolalikarin todistus joutui kuitenkin heti arvostelun kohteeksi. New proof unlocks answer to the p versus np problemmaybe.
If, on the other hand p np, the consequences would be even more stunning, since every one of these problems would have a polynomial time solution. Three weeks back, on august 8, an hp researcher vinay deolalikar put up a draft of a proof sketch for one of the six millennium problems called p np on the internet. His answer is that the two classes do not coincide. What is the current status of vinay deolalikars proof.
Extending results of schindler, hamkins and welch, we establish in the context of infinite time turing machines that p is properly contained in np. May 17, 2019 he should be concrete while telling the differences. Even though vinay deolalikar has solved this p vs np mystery but many of the scientists have not accepted his way of solving the theory, they want him to solve it practically in the right way. On august 6, 2010, vinay deolalikar announced a proof 100page manuscript that p 6 np.
In august 2010, vinay deolalikar, who works at the research arm of hewlettpackard in palo alto, california, believes he has solved the riddle of p vs np in a move that could transform mankinds use of computers. If p np, we could never solve these problems efficiently. The p versus np problem is a major unsolved problem in computer science. Here is a pdf of one of the josephyoung papers, and another tr. 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 problem. Np math problem proposed by hp labs vinay deolalikar. I think theres some metaworry that if all attempts to prove p np are treated as kookery, nobody serious will dare circulate any work on it, and so nobody will actually end up proving it. So when vinay deolalikar, a computer scientist at hewlett packard labs in india, sent an email on august 7, 2010, to a few top researchers claiming that p doesnt equal npthereby answering this question in the negative and staking a claim on the milliondollar millennium prize offered by the clay mathematics instituteit. These really have to do with gibbs potential representation of a distribution. The preliminary version was meant to solicit feedback from a few researchers as is customarily done. Deolalikar that, if p np, it would necessarily assume a. Theres a new paper circulating that claims to prove that p.
In subsequent years, many problems central to diverse areas of application were shown to be npcomplete see gj79 for a list. So its breakable in polynomial time, yet cryptographically secure. This means that to refute the argument it now suffices to refute one of these two parts. Could someone explain how this proof works for us less mathematically incl. Background material for the various concepts used in the preprint. It is bad news for the power of computing sciencedirect. Has the biggest question in computer science been solved. The paper has not been refereed, and i havent seen any independent verifications or refutations.
His discovery has generated excitement among computer scientists worldwide, and has garnered coverage on traditional media sites business and tech. As of this writing, vinay deolalikar still hasnt retracted his p. It seems to be much more easy to come to ends with a paper, when definitions are given. The assumptions involved in the current definition of the p versus np problem as a problem involving non deterministic turing machines ndtms from axiomatic automata theory are criticized. It seemed highly unlikely but one could not dismiss it out of hand. The major open problem in computer science a major open problem in mathematics a clay institute millennium problem million dollar prize. Vinay deolalikar, a research scientist at hp labs in palo alto, ca, posted his proof online and. P vs np mathematical problem is successfully solved by an indian brain. He has already shared them with vinay, and suggested that i highlight them here. Vinay deolalikars proof of pnp and the power of webtest.
Np in a year, they are going to launch a war against the earth, then it is not the good. Np as anyone could predict, the alleged proof has already been slashdotted see also liptons blog and bacons blog, and my own inbox has been filling up faster than the gulf of mexico. If the result stands, it would prove that the two classes p and np are not identical, and impose severe limits on what computers can accomplish implying that many tasks may be fundamentally, irreducibly complex. However, there should be also a computational modelindependent way to determine this number of parameters, as he claims this number is exponential for ksat in hard phase. Np proof richard lipton and ken regan, godels lost letter and pnp, august 11, 2010. Ive only scanned through the paper, but heres a rough summary of how it all hangs together. As one of the six unsolved millenium prize problems and.
For proving p np we can solve an np problem in polynomial time. So there seems to be some going out of their way to treat a serious goodfaith effort with respect. Recently there has been a paper floating around by vinay deolalikar at hp labs which claims to have proved that p. They seem to revolve around an assumption made by dr. He and i have been exchanging emails, and as noted in the. Deolalikar proof pdf 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. On august 8 of this year, vinay deolalikar, principal research scientist in hps storage and information management platforms lab in palo alto, published a scientific proof on p not equal to np available here as an hp labs technical report.
Shtetloptimized blog archive putting my money where my. The claimed proof has inspired a breathtakingly active blog and wiki discussion by some of the top mathematicians and theoretical computer scientists in the world. Vinay deolalikar today i came across this post where one of the computer scientist vinay deolalikar from hp labs solved one of the long standing unsolved puzzle in computer science field. Throughout our proof, we observe that the ability to compute a property on structures in polynomial time is. If pnp, you could still have a cipher that decrypts in linear time with the key and n time without the key. He should be concrete while telling the differences.
It illustrated the interplay of principles from various areas, which was the major effort in constructing the proof. Aug 06, 2010 is p, which is known to be a subset of np, a proper subset. So a polynomial time solution to prroof leads, by a series of mechanical transformations, to a polynomial time solution of satisfiability, which in turn can be used to solve any other np complete problem in polynomial time. Abstract we demonstrate the separation of the complexity class np from its subclass p. Analysis of vinay deolalikar s recent preprint claiming to prove that p.
This terse assertion could have profound implications for the ability of computers to solve many kinds of problem. I am supposed to have studied abc of complexity theory in my undergraduate and graduate schools. Apr 14, 2020 vinay deolalikar is standing by his \mathsfp eq \mathsfnp claim and proof. On 6 august, vinay deolalikar, a mathematician at hewlettpackard labs in palo alto, california, sent out draft copies of a paper titled simply p. August 2010 des bei hewlettpackard angestellten mathematikers vinay deolalikar. It was my understanding that terence tao felt that there was no hope of recovery. Meyer solves the p versus np problem philosophically by showing p is equal to np in the random access with unit multiply mram model. A few days ago, vinay deolalikar of hp labs started circulating a. As one of the six unsolved millenium prize problems and arguably. The commentor asdf has correctly identified that what is being promised here is the mountaintop from a mountaineer who is. Im dead seriousand i can afford it about as well as youd think i can. However, the attempt seems to be quite genuine, and deolalikar has published papers in the same field in the pa.
713 1046 489 571 725 665 382 1477 890 1318 316 1294 1330 1213 731 38 842 744 1565 785 32 1463 1572 1055 953 1305 878 1032 1170 1377 521 653 1266 823 889 1492