If there already is a proof of P-NP which is correct but not yet recognized it can probably be found on this page:
https://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm
(If you can verify any proof using Isabelle or Coq PM me.)
(If you can verify any proof using Isabelle or Coq PM me.)
Rofl. Yep, if i write a machine checkable proof of the most famous open problem in all of computer science, that's definitely the first thing i'll do.
If it was n^10, well, likely different story, involving three letter agencies, I’m afraid.
yeah, but in my case (and presumably the previous commenter's case) I don't know who Zaik on HN is and if they are recognizable in the field. That they asked increases my feeling that it is likely they are recognizable but surely anyone who solves p!=np isn't going to just follow something as irrational as a feeling.
Edit: I now noticed that a few of them have:
3.[Equal]:... Zhu Daming, Luan Junfeng and M. A. Shaohan (all affiliated with Shandong University, China) refute these claims in their paper "Hardness and methods to solve CLIQUE" (Journal of Computer Science and Technology 16, 2001, pp 388-391).
Sadly, no. I have talked to the author of one of those papers and apparently there is not a lot of motivation to check new proof attempts from the relevant people anymore.