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

From	Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.theory
Subject	Re: revised relativization theorem: P=NP for small N, P!=NP for large N
Date	2021-07-28 20:52 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<875ywu8bdq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References	(10 earlier) <c4889dd6-7fff-4355-b739-c2ff40757b40n@googlegroups.com> <87k0ldb3ka.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <4ed2a984-a1d2-4ed4-b182-d6e6c42f4262n@googlegroups.com> <87bl6m8ktw.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <8be0b3ce-0a82-4440-b03c-b1873ecc4cbfn@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday, July 28, 2021 at 12:27:57 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Daniel Pehoushek <pehou...@gmail.com> writes: 
>> 
>> > On Monday, July 26, 2021 at 9:35:51 AM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: 
>> >> Daniel Pehoushek <pehou...@gmail.com> writes: 
>> >> 
>> >> > the model count of a boolean formula tells how many satisfying 
>> >> > assignments there are. obtaining the correct model count implies that 
>> >> > every solution may be processed. 
>> >> > 
>> >> > approximating the model count is stupid, ignoring the deep value of 
>> >> > correctness. 
>> >> 
>> >> Did bob get the counts right to withing the accuracy of the log_10 
>> >> estimate? 
>> >
>> > approximation is just plain wrong.
>> Just a heads-up: you are more likely to get people engaging with what 
>> you say if you answer their questions.
>> > bob gets the counts right.
>> So is that a "yes"? Did bob's counts match the figures expected from 
>> competition entrants or not? 
>
> there were not very many benchmarks solvable in the allotted time 
> by an exact solver like bob, but bob got all those right.
>
> the problem is for some reason they love approximate answers.
> so programs that answered everything, but only approximately, 
> are doing well.

Maybe this was not the right competition for bob.  What did the
requirements say a solver had to do?

> the committee has never given me any competition results report.
> i have been trying to get any reply from them, but nothing so far.
> they don't tell me how well bob did; something is wrong, 
> because all i get are null responses.

Do you have someone who can review your submissions to the committee?
If they are anything like your posting here, the committee may not have
clue about what you are saying.

-- 
Ben.

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