Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Monday July 29 2019, @12:20AM   Printer-friendly

Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages

Over the years, computer scientists have developed many ways to measure the complexity of a given Boolean function. Each measure captures a different aspect of how the information in the input string determines the output bit. For instance, the "sensitivity" of a Boolean function tracks, roughly speaking, the likelihood that flipping a single input bit will alter the output bit. And "query complexity" calculates how many input bits you have to ask about before you can be sure of the output.

Each measure provides a unique window into the structure of the Boolean function. Yet computer scientists have found that nearly all these measures fit into a unified framework, so that the value of any one of them is a rough gauge for the value of the others. Only one complexity measure didn't seem to fit in: sensitivity.

In 1992, Noam Nisan of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Mario Szegedy, now of Rutgers University, conjectured that sensitivity does indeed fit into this framework. But no one could prove it. "This, I would say, probably was the outstanding open question in the study of Boolean functions," Servedio said. "People wrote long, complicated papers trying to make the tiniest progress," said Ryan O'Donnell of Carnegie Mellon University.

Now Hao Huang, a mathematician at Emory University, has proved the sensitivity conjecture with an ingenious but elementary two-page argument about the combinatorics of points on cubes. "It is just beautiful, like a precious pearl," wrote Claire Mathieu, of the French National Center for Scientific Research, during a Skype interview. Aaronson and O'Donnell both called Huang's paper the "book" proof of the sensitivity conjecture, referring to Paul Erdős' notion of a celestial book in which God writes the perfect proof of every theorem. "I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this," Aaronson wrote.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @12:41AM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @12:41AM (#872471)

    I knew the "conjecture" was true way before.

  • (Score: 2) by martyb on Monday July 29 2019, @01:45AM (4 children)

    by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 29 2019, @01:45AM (#872488) Journal
    Prove it.
    --
    Wit is intellect, dancing.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @02:34AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @02:34AM (#872497)

      Assume the predicate false. Then I wouldn't have known it to be true, but I knew it to be true, and way back when. Therefore it is true.

      Q.E.D.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 29 2019, @05:24AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 29 2019, @05:24AM (#872534) Journal
        Classic example of why math works. It's not about "knowing" stuff. It's about proving what you claim to know.
      • (Score: 2) by martyb on Monday July 29 2019, @10:41AM (1 child)

        by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 29 2019, @10:41AM (#872575) Journal

        And just how is it that you "knew it to be true"? Claim without facts in evidence.

        Let's try your "proof" using this conjecture: "The Earth is flat."

        --
        Wit is intellect, dancing.
        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @06:46PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 29 2019, @06:46PM (#872764)

          Claim without facts in evidence.

          You clearly failed to notice "Q.E.D." The proof concludes, conclusively, with a "Q.E.D." at the end. Do you know what "Q.E.D." means? In math, it means "shut the fuck up, case closed."