Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.theory > #37291

Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N

Show all headers | View raw

Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 3:12:36 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Daniel Pehoushek <pehou...@gmail.com> writes: 
>> 
>> > +All solvers must output the base 10 log of the result, but the format 
>> > +allows for an exact count as well. 
>> > 
>> > the log10 format saves a few bytes on a two day computation 
>> > where accuracy of the answer is paramount. they allow printing out 
>> > the precise answer but the competition fails to use it.
>> So it would appear. I've just read the scoring system used, add all 
>> "accepted" solutions count. A solution is acceptable if it is within 
>> some relative error bound of the expected result.
>> > they did that because they have a clique of researchers 
>> > that do not give precise answers to the precise 
>> > question of model counts. they have the impression 
>> > that making a wild guess at the value of a deeply 
>> > meaningful number may also be deeply meaningful.
>> Wild guesses won't win. The error bound is not wide enough for that. 
>> 
>> I wonder how these approximate solvers work. Maybe they have a way to 
>> count all the "low hanging fruit" first, and then expect the other 
>> solutions not yet found will not put the result out of bounds.
>> > i am trying to argue with them, and trying to 
>> > get information on how well bob did and 
>> > who won track 1.
>> I think you need to give them time. It can't be easy in these troubled 
>> times to collate all of the data. 
>> 
>> But arguing for different criteria when the scoring was publish before 
>> the competition was run just won't work. 
>> 
>
> if the problem has a validateable answer bob gets it.
> bob does one trillion inferences per hour.

That's not a helpful number because an inference might lead to large
or a small change in the count.

> the "no answer yet" after alotted time on track 1 could 
> "legally" be considered better than an approximate answer.
> but i do not think they do that, else bob would be winning 
> and they would tell me so.

The scoring is explicitly defined in the competition's documents.  I
don't think "no answer yet" counts for anything.

> they have told me nothing after three weeks of trying 
> since the end of the conference.  no reports. nothing.
> null responses only. like a blacklist.

They don't do this for money.  They are all volunteers.  They all
probably have full-time jobs and families and might even hope to have
some free time for relaxation.

But if you got someone who you know has good writing skill to review you
communications with the competition you are more likely to get something
back.  Your posts here would stop me from replying at all if I were
involved with the conference.

-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 18:19 -0700
  Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 02:44 -0700
    Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N DV <xlt.pjw@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 05:37 -0700
      Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-08 14:21 -0600
        Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 07:28 -0700
          Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N DV <xlt.pjw@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 14:28 -0700
            Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 12:51 -0700
              Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-18 03:45 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N DV <xlt.pjw@gmail.com> - 2021-07-18 06:48 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-18 14:28 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-26 04:45 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-26 14:35 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 00:35 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 02:40 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-28 17:27 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 11:50 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-28 20:52 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 15:53 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 16:58 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 17:41 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 01:45 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 20:07 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 20:27 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 14:59 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 02:27 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 06:24 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 07:50 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-29 11:44 -0600
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 11:59 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-29 13:23 -0600
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 20:04 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 15:56 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 11:53 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 20:12 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 13:12 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-29 23:18 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 15:36 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 16:38 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 00:59 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 17:05 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 01:19 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 17:27 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 02:22 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 19:16 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-29 22:25 -0600
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 00:35 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 10:53 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 05:19 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 14:22 +0100
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 07:16 -0700
                Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-30 15:22 +0100

csiph-web