Re:Graph Isomorphism update: quasipolynomial claim restored
by Jweb_Guru on Monday January 09, 2017 @08:12PM
(#13361645)
Graph isomorphism isn't that important practically (subgraph isomorphism is, but it's NP-complete and, IIRC, APX-hard as well) and the hard graph cases don't come up much in practice (despite being a relatively large percentage of random graphs, AFAIK). I think it reflects a difference in how mathematics is done; the quasipolynomial result was first presented at a conference, not in a paper, which definitely wouldn't have been the case 20 years ago.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Graph Isomorphism update: quasipolynomial claim restored
by mafribe on Monday January 09, 2017 @08:48PM
(#13361841)
Wiles' original FLT result was first presented at a workshop in Cambridge, although he didn't explicitly state that he had succeeded (sans the gap) in proving FLT, he left that for the audience to infer.
Re:Graph Isomorphism update: quasipolynomial claim restored
by tacomonstrous on Monday January 09, 2017 @09:52PM
(#13362149)
And that doesn't even make it unusual. Most mathematical results are first presented at conferences or workshops, sometimes long before publication.