P = NP

back to index

description: an unsolved problem in computer science regarding the relationship between polynomial-time problems and non-deterministic polynomial-time problems

22 results

The Golden Ticket: P, NP, and the Search for the Impossible

by Lance Fortnow  · 30 Mar 2013  · 236pp  · 50,763 words

a procedure that finds golden tickets, such as the solutions to all the other Millennium Prize Problems. Prove P = NP and get $6 million for solving the six unsolved Millennium Problems. Showing either P = NP or P ≠ NP won’t be easy. If you want $6 million, you’ll have a better chance playing the lottery

some problems, like factoring large numbers, that remain out of reach for current machines. Quantum mechanics can also give us unbreakable secrets whether or not P = NP. What about the future? The great challenges of computing still lie ahead of us. How do we deal with computers that have to work together

algorithm that solves NP problems. Let’s jump to the year 2026 and explore this beautiful world, almost surely a fantasy world, the world of P = NP. First let’s see how this world developed. The Urbana Algorithm In 2016, a Czech mathematician, Milena Pavel, emailed around a theoretical algorithm for solving

solutions can also be found quickly. Conversely, if there is even one problem in NP where no algorithm can find a quick solution, then P ≠ NP. Determining whether P = NP is the most important question in computer science and perhaps in all of mathematics. Many have tried hard to find good algorithms for problems

of NP. If you have an efficient algorithm for solving satisfiability, then all the problems whose solutions we can efficiently check have efficient algorithms, and P = NP. You just need one efficient algorithm for satisfiability and the Clay Institute’s million dollars is yours. Satisfiability is itself an NP problem since we

expression true, making satisfiability the hardest of all problems in NP. Determining whether or not satisfiability has efficient algorithms is the same as determining whether P = NP. Steve Cook presented his paper at the STOC conference on May 4, 1971, in what was then the Stouffer’s Somerset Inn in Shaker Heights

hardest problems in NP. Like satisfiability, if we had some quick algorithm to solve clique, then every problem in NP would have efficient algorithms and P = NP. Cook showed how to reduce problems like clique to satisfiability. Karp showed how to reduce satisfiability to clique. The very different-looking problems of satisfiability

path, map coloring, and max-cut. Solve any of these problems efficiently and you have an efficient algorithm for all of them and have shown P = NP. If P ≠ NP, then none of these twenty-one problems (including satisfiability) has a quick algorithm. Karp did not invent these twenty-one problems, nor were these

such an embarrassment, and in fact I’m willing to give a prize of one live turkey to the first person who proves that P = NP.” So prove P = NP and you will win a million dollars and a turkey. Beyond Karp After Karp’s paper, an industry in computer science arose showing the

talks about the satisfiability problem and formulates the P versus NP question in different terminology. He suggests that if we lived in a world where P = NP, “the mental work of a mathematician concerning Yes-or-No questions could be completely replaced by a machine. … Now it seems to me, however,

Annals of the History of Computing 6, no. 4 (October 1984). Chapter 6 DEALING WITH HARDNESS IN CHAPTER 2 WE SAW THE BEAUTIFUL WORLD where P = NP, and life was good. We could optimize everything and learn anything. We had machines that could do just about anything we could imagine them to

immediately after Cook, Karp, and Levin brought the problem and its importance to the world, computer scientists and mathematicians tried to formally prove that P = NP or P ≠ NP. All the usual techniques failed to work. By the end of the 1970s the general consensus was that “substantially new proof techniques will probably be

versus NP problem, claiming to show P ≠ NP, or P = NP, or that it is impossible to determine whether or not P = NP, or that the P versus NP question doesn’t even make sense. Every year dozens of these manuscripts are emailed

message. Hellman could use his private key on “tzljcnnfekktis” to recover the original message, “Attack at noon.” Is public-key cryptography even possible? Not if P = NP. If P = NP, there would be an efficient algorithm to recover the correct private key from the public key. Even by 1976 most computer scientists believed that

could find the prime factors of numbers that are millions of digits long. P = NP would break the RSA protocol. P = NP breaks all public-key protocols, for if P = NP, you can always recover the private key from the public key. If P = NP, it is impossible to send secret messages to someone you have never communicated

messages, all encryptions are equally likely, and it is mathematically impossible to learn anything about the message given the pad, no matter whether or not P = NP. So why don’t we all use one-time pads instead of the more complicated and possibly breakable schemes based on factoring numbers? You have

created by some trusted organization (the U.S. government?) with some method of providing the same pad securely to Facebook and other companies as well. P = NP makes most things much easier, but it makes cryptography a bit more painful. Facebook could also use quantum mechanics to both create and transmit a

off computation time for better pseudorandom generators is a tricky choice to make. Pseudorandom number generators work well if we have suitably complex problems. If P = NP, every efficiently computable process can be inverted in some sense. It would be hard, if not impossible, to create computationally random coin tosses. Rock-paper

Grover algorithm is the best one can do for NP-complete problems using a quantum computer, so it is unlikely that a quantum version of P = NP could be true. Even if physicists managed to build quantum computers, our hardest problems would remain beyond their reach. That doesn’t mean quantum

to the light bulbs we read by. How do we make the best use of this ultraconnected world? Whether or not it turns out that P = NP or P ≠ NP, thinking about P and NP shapes how we address these challenges. Parallel Computing In 1965, Gordon Moore noticed that the number of basic components

random noise or redundant data. Finding the crucial useful part of a data collection is difficult, and then we need to interpret that information. If P = NP, we would have algorithms that could work their way through the data, working through the important parts and using tools based on the principle of

Nearly everything in this chapter, except the section on Occam’s razor, is a figment of my imagination meant to illustrate the unlikely world of P = NP. Chapter 3 On Milgram’s experiment, see Stanley Milgram, “The Small World Problem,” Psychology Today 2, no. 1 (1967): 60–67. The Bacon number calculation

, 35–36, 76–77 efficiency: of algorithms, 36; defining, 76–78 efficient computation. See P Einstein, Albert, 21 ellipsoid algorithm, 69–70 employment, effect of P = NP on, 27 Enigma machine, 124–26, 125 entertainment, automated creation of, 25 Entscheidungsproblem, 49 Erdős, Paul, 32, 32n Euler, Leonhard, 38–39 Eulerian paths, 39

–83, 84, 167 Kolmogorov complexity, 83 Komsomol, 85 language, sentences in, 75, 75–76 language translation, 18, 23 Large Hadron Collider, 158 law enforcement, and P = NP, 25–26 laws of motion, 20–21 Levin, Leonid, 6, 79, 83–85 LHC Computing Grid, 158 Liapunov, Alexy, 79 liar’s paradox, 110–13

, 16–19 map coloring: explanation of problem, 42–43, 43; heuristic for, 92–96, 93, 94, 95, 96; as NP, 46 market equilibrium, 49 marketing, P = NP and, 27 Martian rule, 86–87 Marxism, and probability theory, 81 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 85 matchmaking, 33–36, 34, 35, 117–18 mathematics, NP

–50 math puzzles, usefulness of, 4–5 Matsuoka, Yoky, 5–6, 165 max-cut problem, 45, 46 McCulloch, Warren, 75 McLean, Malcolm, 160 medicine, and P = NP, 14–15 Merkle, Roger, 127 messenger RNA (mRNA), 47–48 Meyer, Albert, 85 microprocessors: capabilities of, 90–92; parallel, 155, 156–57; speed of, 156

, 80 Perelman, Grigori, 7, 12 personalized recommendations, 23, 25 physics, NP problems in, 48, 48 Pippenger, Nicholas, 157 Pitts, Walter, 75 P = NC, 157–58 P = NP: big data and, 159; cryptography and, 129–30; imagined possibilities of, 12–19, 23–27; implications of, ix, 6, 9, 10, 46; importance of question

, 104 Poe, Edgar Allan, 124 Poincaré conjecture, 7 poker protocol, 137 polyalphabetic cipher, 124 polytope, 69–70, 70 prime numbers, 67–69, 129 privacy, and P = NP, 26–27 private-key cryptography, 26 probability theory, Kolmogorov and, 81–82, 167 products, in computations, 138 programs: contradictions in, 112; for hand control, 5

–6 protein folding, 47–48 protein threading, 48 pseudorandomness, 140 public-key cryptography: factoring in, 140–41; P = NP and, 26, 127; randomness in, 136–37 public randomness, 136 P versus NP: circuit size in, 116; clique circuit computation and, 117; Eastern history of

Hands-On Machine Learning With Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow: Concepts, Tools, and Techniques to Build Intelligent Systems

by Aurelien Geron  · 14 Aug 2019

can be reduced in polynomial time. An NP-Complete problem is both NP and NP-Hard. A major open mathematical question is whether or not P = NP. If P ≠ NP (which seems likely), then no polynomial algorithm will ever be found for any NP-Complete problem (except perhaps on a quantum computer). 3 log2

Hands-On Machine Learning With Scikit-Learn and TensorFlow: Concepts, Tools, and Techniques to Build Intelligent Systems

by Aurélien Géron  · 13 Mar 2017  · 1,331pp  · 163,200 words

can be reduced in polynomial time. An NP-Complete problem is both NP and NP-Hard. A major open mathematical question is whether or not P = NP. If P ≠ NP (which seems likely), then no polynomial algorithm will ever be found for any NP-Complete problem (except perhaps on a quantum computer). 3 log2

Natural language processing with Python

by Steven Bird, Ewan Klein and Edward Loper  · 15 Dec 2009  · 504pp  · 89,238 words

_pairs = nltk.bigrams(brown_news_tagged) >>> list(nltk.FreqDist(a[1] for (a, b) in word_tag_pairs if b[1] == 'N')) ['DET', 'ADJ', 'N', 'P', 'NP', 'NUM', 'V', 'PRO', 'CNJ', '.', ',', 'VG', 'VN', ...] This confirms our assertion that nouns occur after determiners and adjectives, including numeral adjectives (tagged as NUM). Verbs Verbs

phrase: I shot an elephant in my pajamas. First we need to define a simple grammar: >>> ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... groucho_grammar = nltk.parse_cfg(""" S -> NP VP PP -> P NP NP -> Det N | Det N PP | 'I' VP -> V NP | VP PP Det -> 'an' | 'my' N -> 'elephant' | 'pajamas' V -> 'shot' P -> 'in' """) 8.1 Some

by the grammar. Example 8-1. A simple context-free grammar. grammar1 = nltk.parse_cfg(""" S -> NP VP VP -> V NP | V NP PP PP -> P NP V -> "saw" | "ate" | "walked" NP -> "John" | "Mary" | "Bob" | Det N | Det N PP Det -> "a" | "an" | "the" | "my" N -> "man" | "dog" | "cat" | "telescope" | "park" P

= nltk.parse_cfg(""" S -> NP VP NP -> Det Nom | PropN Nom -> Adj Nom | N VP -> V Adj | V NP | V S | V NP PP PP -> P NP PropN -> 'Buster' | 'Chatterer' | 'Joe' Det -> 'the' | 'a' N -> 'bear' | 'squirrel' | 'tree' | 'fish' | 'log' Adj -> 'angry' | 'frightened' | 'little' | 'tall' V -> 'chased' | 'saw' | 'said' | 'thought' | 'was' | 'put

[SEM=?pp] VP[SEM=(?v + ?ap)] -> IV[SEM=?v] AP[SEM=?ap] NP[SEM=(?det + ?n)] -> Det[SEM=?det] N[SEM=?n] PP[SEM=(?p + ?np)] -> P[SEM=?p] NP[SEM=?np] AP[SEM=?pp] -> A[SEM=?a] PP[SEM=?pp] NP[SEM='Country="greece"'] -> 'Greece' NP[SEM='Country="china"'] -> 'China' Det[SEM='SELECT

Python for Finance

by Yuxing Yan  · 24 Apr 2014  · 408pp  · 85,118 words

as np, datetime ticker='AAPL' path='http://www.google.com/finance/getprices?q=ttt&i=60&p=1d&f=d,o,h,l,c ,v' p=np.array(pd.read_csv(path.replace('ttt',ticker),skiprows=7,header=No ne)) date=[] for i in arange(0,len(p)): if p[i][0

their conversion is vital. Assume that we have four prices and we choose the first and last three prices as follows: >>>import numpy as np >>>p=np.array([1,1.1,0.9,1.05]) [ 185 ] Statistical Analysis of Time Series It is important how these prices are sorted. If the first

quotes_historical_yahoo begdate=(2013,10,1) enddate=(2013,10,30) ticker='IBM' #WMT data= quotes_historical_yahoo(ticker, begdate, enddate,asobject=True, adjusted=True) p=np.array(data.aclose) dollar_vol=np.array(data.volume*p) ret=np.array((p[1:] - p[:-1])/p[1:]) illiq=mean(np.divide(abs(ret

The Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets

by Simon Singh  · 29 Oct 2013  · 262pp  · 65,959 words

arrangement of Euler’s equation is visible over Homer’s left shoulder. This equation also appears in “MoneyBART.” Finally, in the same image, the relationship P = NP can be seen over Homer’s right shoulder. Although the majority of viewers would not have noticed these three letters, let alone given them a

second thought, P = NP represents a statement about one of the most important unsolved problems in theoretical computer science. P = NP is a statement concerning two types of mathematical problems. P stands for polynomial and NP for nondeterministic polynomial

, this would jeopardize the security of everything from personal online purchases to high-level international political and military communications. The problem is often summarized as “P = NP or P ≠ NP?”, which asks the question: Will apparently difficult problems (NP) one day be shown to be just as easy as simple problems (P), or not

? Finding the solution to the mystery of P = NP or P ≠ NP? is on the mathematicians’ most wanted list, and there is even a prize on its head. The Clay Mathematics Institute, established in Cambridge, Massachusetts

, listed this puzzle as one of its seven Millennium Prize Problems in 2000, offering a $1 million reward for a definitive answer to the question P = NP or P ≠ NP? David S. Cohen, who explored P-type and NP-type problems while studying for his master’s degree in computer science at the University

of California, Berkeley, has a hunch that NP-type problems are indeed much easier than we currently think, which is why P = NP appears behind Homer in his 3-D universe. However, Cohen holds a minority view. When William Gasarch, a computer scientist at the University of Maryland

, polled one hundred researchers in 2002, only 9 percent thought that P = NP, while 61 percent favored P ≠ NP. He repeated the poll in 2010, and this time 81 percent favored P ≠ NP. Of course, truth in mathematics is not decided by a popularity contest, but if the majority turn

out to be right, then Cohen’s positioning of P = NP in the landscape of “Homer3” will look somewhat incongruous. This, however, should not prove to be an issue in the short term, as half of

be the case that I made a wise decision.” Although he has neither invented a radical new computing technology nor cracked the mystery of whether P = NP or P ≠ NP, Cohen still feels that he might have made an indirect contribution to research: “I really would have preferred to live my whole life as

Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach

by Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig  · 14 Jul 2019  · 2,466pp  · 668,761 words

P = NP look at a subclass of NP called the NP-complete problems. The word “complete” is used here in the sense of “most extreme” and thus

propositional logic, is there an assignment of truth values to the proposition symbols of the sentence that makes it true? Unless a miracle occurs and P = NP, there can be no algorithm that solves all satisfiability problems in polynomial time. However, AI is more interested in whether there are algorithms that perform

that PSPACE-hard problems are worse than NP-complete problems, although it could turn out that NP = PSPACE, just as it could turn out that P = NP. A.2Vectors, Matrices, and Linear Algebra Mathematicians define a vector as a member of a vector space, but we will use a more concrete definition

Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions

by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths  · 4 Apr 2016  · 523pp  · 143,139 words

to check—but finding a route less than 1,000 miles, or proving that it’s impossible, is another feat entirely. The question of whether P = NP (i.e., whether it’s possible to jump efficiently to the solutions of NP problems) is the greatest unsolved mystery in computer science. The main

are certain problems with a special status: if one of them can be solved efficiently, then any problem in NP can be solved efficiently and P = NP (Cook, “The Complexity of Theorem-Proving Procedures”). These are known as “NP-hard” problems. In the absence of an answer to whether

P = NP, problems in NP cannot be solved efficiently, which is why we refer to them as “intractable.” (In “A Terminological Proposal,” Donald Knuth suggested this as

an appropriate label for NP-hard problems, in addition to offering a live turkey to anybody who could prove P = NP.) The intractable scheduling problems that Eugene Lawler encountered in chapter 5 fall into this category. An NP-hard problem that is itself in NP is

2002 survey of one hundred leading theoretical computer scientists, sixty-one thought P ≠ NP and only nine thought P = NP (Gasarch, “The P =? NP Poll”). While proving P = NP could be done by exhibiting a polynomial-time algorithm for an NP-complete problem, proving P ≠ NP requires making complex arguments about the limits of polynomial-time algorithms, and there

six major open problems in mathematics for whose solutions the Clay Mathematics Institute will award a “Millennium Prize” of $1 million. The question of whether P = NP, which we saw in chapter 8, is also a Millennium Prize problem.) “Michael, this is Vaughan”: Rabin tells this story in Shasha and Lazere, Out

, A. J. M., and P. Coles. “Bayesian Inductive Inference and the Anthropic Cosmological Principle.” Comments on Astrophysics. 17 (1993): 23–47. Gasarch, William I. “The P =? NP Poll.” SIGACT News 33, no. 2 (2002): 34–47. Gauthier, David P. Morals by Agreement. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Geman, Stuart, Elie Bienenstock

Elliptic Tales: Curves, Counting, and Number Theory

by Avner Ash and Robert Gross  · 12 Mar 2012

verify that in the example we used before, where p = 7, the group has 8 elements.) We will be most concerned with the number ap = p − Np . Why is the formula for ap different for singular curves than for nonsingular 146 CHAPTER 9 Table 9.4. Counting points on singular cubics Type

p, we worked out Np in chapter 9. The results, taken from table 9.4, are that Np = p if E has additive reduction at p, Np = p − 1 if E has split multiplicative reduction at p, and Np = p + 1 if E has nonsplit multiplicative reduction at p. Next we review

The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language

by Steven Pinker  · 1 Jan 1994  · 661pp  · 187,613 words

, and an optional prepositional phrase.” VP VNP(PP) “A verb phrase can consist of a verb, a noun phrase, and an optional prepositional phrase.” PP P NP “A prepositional phrase can consist of a preposition and a noun phrase.” N boy, girl, dog, cat, ice cream, candy, hotdogs “The nouns in the

Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C

by Bruce Schneier  · 10 Nov 1993

The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World

by Pedro Domingos  · 21 Sep 2015  · 396pp  · 117,149 words

The Mathematics of Banking and Finance

by Dennis W. Cox and Michael A. A. Cox  · 30 Apr 2006  · 312pp  · 35,664 words

Asset and Risk Management: Risk Oriented Finance

by Louis Esch, Robert Kieffer and Thierry Lopez  · 28 Nov 2005  · 416pp  · 39,022 words

Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control

by Stuart Russell  · 7 Oct 2019  · 416pp  · 112,268 words

Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren't the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room Is the Room

by David Weinberger  · 14 Jul 2011  · 369pp  · 80,355 words

Rationality: From AI to Zombies

by Eliezer Yudkowsky  · 11 Mar 2015  · 1,737pp  · 491,616 words

The Man From the Future: The Visionary Life of John Von Neumann

by Ananyo Bhattacharya  · 6 Oct 2021  · 476pp  · 121,460 words

How I Became a Quant: Insights From 25 of Wall Street's Elite

by Richard R. Lindsey and Barry Schachter  · 30 Jun 2007

I'm Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59

by Douglas Edwards  · 11 Jul 2011  · 496pp  · 154,363 words

The Transhumanist Reader

by Max More and Natasha Vita-More  · 4 Mar 2013  · 798pp  · 240,182 words

Software Design for Flexibility

by Chris Hanson and Gerald Sussman  · 17 Feb 2021