https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.09512
Resolves YES if by 2050 (or earlier) there emerges a consensus that the proof is correct, or at least a number of prominent complexity theorists describe it as such.
(Things that will be sufficient for a YES: Scott Aaronson or Terry Tao publicly endorses the proof not on April 1st. Wikipedia article for p vs np problem states that it's solved by Ke Xu and Guangyan Zhou and the edit sticks indefinitely. Ke Xu and Guangyan Zhou receive a Fields prize or the Millennium prize.)
Otherwise NO.
1,000
3.00This paper has been published in Frontiers of Computer Science, 2025, 19(12): 1912405
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-025-50231-4
The appendices include an extended abstract of the paper and comments from seven experts.
Computer Scientists Prove Some Logic Puzzles Have No Shortcuts
https://scienceblog.com/computer-scientists-prove-some-logic-puzzles-have-no-shortcuts/
resolves no, it's false (see Is the proof of P != NP by Ke Xu and Guangyan Zhou valid? | Manifold)
@DottedCalculator If you look at the comments in the market you mentioned, there is no unanimity of opinion.
@DottedCalculator Sorry, don't hold your hopes that I'll do a quick NO resolution just because there's no chance the proof might be correct. This is specifically about the consensus, we'll have to wait a million years to see.
@Tasty_Y This paper has been published with severn comments from experts in Frontiers of Computer Science, 2025, 19(12): 1912405
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-025-50231-4