{"schema_version":"claim-reader-v1","record":{"available_versions":[2,1],"current_version":2,"assessment_summary":"consistent","claim":{"statement":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","slug":"pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P = NP, the polynomial hierarchy collapses to P","assumptions":["The classical finite-level polynomial hierarchy and deterministic polynomial time."],"scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},"sha256":"acae21ceb868cd70967d79ee64ab6bad8966c13687c82696c7d1754c6d4084a9","contexts":[{"assessment_history":[{"report_id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_id":"pnp-book","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","state":"resolved","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"}],"problem_id":"problem-p-vs-np","slug":"p-vs-np","title":"P versus NP","publication_version":14,"relationship":{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},"assessments":[{"report_id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_id":"pnp-book","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","state":"resolved","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"}],"connections":[],"related_claims":[],"progress":[{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","remaining":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"}],"tasks":[],"statements":[{"statement":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","slug":"pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P = NP, the polynomial hierarchy collapses to P","assumptions":["The classical finite-level polynomial hierarchy and deterministic polynomial time."],"scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"formal_declarations":[],"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"}],"entries":[{"id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"hierarchy-collapse","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§4.1, polynomial hierarchy; P = NP collapse discussion","supersedes":null}],"sources":[{"work":{"authors":["Avi Wigderson"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation — proof text","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","version":"author-draft-2019-08-06","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829"}],"published":{"value":"2019"}},"id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_id":"pnp-book","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","owner":"Avi Wigderson","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"author-draft-2019-08-06","content_sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","attribution":"Avi Wigderson","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30}]}],"assessments":[{"report_id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_id":"pnp-book","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","state":"resolved","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"}],"sources":[{"work":{"authors":["Avi Wigderson"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation — proof text","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","version":"author-draft-2019-08-06","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829"}],"published":{"value":"2019"}},"id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_id":"pnp-book","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","owner":"Avi Wigderson","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"author-draft-2019-08-06","content_sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","attribution":"Avi Wigderson","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30}],"entries":[{"id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"hierarchy-collapse","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§4.1, polynomial hierarchy; P = NP collapse discussion","supersedes":null}],"formalizations":[],"tasks":[],"assessment_state":"proved","publication":{"version":14,"sha256":"952cfabb6af552d8644db8bd2f985ca4c57525de8c6788ae12adc0726c28802b","published_at":"2026-10-20T20:34:29.388115+00:00","reason":"Reviewed reader correction: preserve assertion history, exact citations and scoped assessments; task evidence names its exact Claim target.","withdrawn":false,"draft":{"reader_guide":{"reading":[{"entry_id":"pnp-entry-equality:v1","role":"introduction","note":"Read the setting and notation before comparing the results."},{"entry_id":"pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","role":"proof","note":"Read the mathematical argument; inspect its Claim for assessment and scope."}],"definitions":[{"id":"p-vs-np-definition","term":"Decision problem and certificate","explanation":"A decision problem has a yes-or-no answer. NP permits a polynomially bounded certificate for a yes answer that can be checked in polynomial time.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-equality:v1"]}],"proofs":[],"bounds":[],"witnesses":[],"contributors":{"summary":"Classical barriers are credited to Baker–Gill–Solovay, Razborov–Rudich and Aaronson–Wigderson. Williams and later author teams provide the scoped advances. Disclosed AI contributions are attributed separately by source.","source_entry_ids":["p-vs-np:entry:0:v1","pnp-entry-general-status:v1","pnp-entry-equality:v1","pnp-entry-inequality:v1","pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1","pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","pnp-entry-np-conp:v1","pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-karp-lipton:v1","pnp-entry-ladner:v1","pnp-entry-one-way:v1","pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-eth:v1","pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1","pnp-entry-seth:v1","pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-relativization:v1","pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","pnp-entry-algebrization:v1","pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1","pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1","pnp-entry-np-search:v1","pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1","pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-activity-aletheia:v1","pnp-entry-activity-gpt4:v1"]},"scopes":[],"connections":{"statements":[{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"label":"P = NP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-in-p","version":2},"label":"SAT in polynomial time"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","version":2},"label":"General NP circuit lower bounds"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"label":"P ≠ NP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","version":2},"label":"NP ≠ coNP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-one-way","version":2},"label":"One-way functions exist"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth","version":2},"label":"Exponential Time Hypothesis"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth","version":2},"label":"Randomized Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","version":2},"label":"VP versus VNP"}],"relationships":[{"connection_id":"pnp-connection-vp-vnp-inequality","title":"Boolean and algebraic complexity"}]}},"representations":[{"hash_profile":"rfc8785","schema_version":"visual-representation-v1","id":"visual-p-vs-np-overview","version":3,"subject":{"kind":"problem","id":"problem-p-vs-np","sha256":"ada323704b4bd6ac0704c10b7908ca602a83f0575dc15956aa531eed19d4d5e5"},"purpose":"connections","title":"How the complexity questions connect","caption":"A selected map of equivalence, one-way implications and a different-model analogue. Open premises remain open.","description":"P = NP is equivalent to SAT having a polynomial-time algorithm. The selected circuit lower-bound, NP versus coNP, one-way-function, ETH and randomized-SETH assertions each imply P ≠ NP under their exact formulations. VP versus VNP is a different-model analogue, not an implication. Supporting implication theorems do not establish their premises or either answer to P versus NP.","assumptions":["Classical uniform deterministic worst-case polynomial time for the canonical question.","Each stronger premise retains its own nonuniform, randomized or average-case assumptions on its Claim page."],"limitation":"This is a selected relations map, not the full landscape of complexity classes. An established implication does not prove its open endpoints. P ≠ NP alone does not imply one-way functions, ETH or the displayed stronger lower bounds. Barriers and restricted-model progress remain in their existing sections.","author":"OpenMath curation","authoring_method":"ai_assisted_curation","authored_on":"2026-10-11","independent_review":"pending","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-equality:v1","pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-eth:v1","pnp-entry-inequality:v1","pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","pnp-entry-np-conp:v1","pnp-entry-one-way:v1","pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1","pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-seth:v1","pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1"],"payload":{"kind":"relations_map","nodes":[{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"label":"P = NP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-in-p","version":2},"label":"SAT in polynomial time"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"label":"P ≠ NP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","version":2},"label":"NP ⊄ P/poly"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","version":2},"label":"NP ≠ coNP"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-one-way","version":2},"label":"One-way functions exist"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth","version":2},"label":"ETH"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth","version":2},"label":"Randomized SETH"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","version":2},"label":"VP versus VNP"}],"connections":[{"id":"pnp-connection-equality-sat-in-p","sha256":"aed280ec5d65d4544750a888470b6f05ffac2448ae7fe3fdc1bf60d345c4ce1a"},{"id":"pnp-connection-np-circuits-inequality","sha256":"16c8b65898342b5db18aa011cf018ada1f61fc24710751754621d1bf7680eecd"},{"id":"pnp-connection-np-conp-inequality","sha256":"46dd6605caaeb85de338849d42dbb36c802a202a117158de40474716b908d95f"},{"id":"pnp-connection-one-way-inequality","sha256":"53cc4f44ac7a7a19ff61ce60b67c166480054f978f157d2097b0829c0346cd9e"},{"id":"pnp-connection-eth-inequality","sha256":"604855825a163293dab9d4d89d2b28c8aa3034d558a3a66082af6eaddb56fe88"},{"id":"pnp-connection-seth-inequality","sha256":"a07c69e7ff84bae8b2303bc38f76b5316958b58b3e6d5a52b51a6584de0962bc"},{"id":"pnp-connection-vp-vnp-inequality","sha256":"1800070847a30a70af67eb10da46e7c38dd534055537d3e818e18c39bfc17608"}]}},{"hash_profile":"rfc8785","schema_version":"visual-representation-v1","id":"p-vs-np-two-worlds","version":1,"subject":{"kind":"problem","id":"problem-p-vs-np","sha256":"ada323704b4bd6ac0704c10b7908ca602a83f0575dc15956aa531eed19d4d5e5"},"purpose":"setup","title":"The two possible worlds","caption":"Exactly one of these pictures is true, and the question is which. Each region and consequence is a proved conditional statement; select one to read it exactly.","description":"If P ≠ NP, the class P sits strictly inside NP: NP-complete problems lie outside P, and some problems in NP are neither in P nor NP-complete (Ladner). If P = NP, the three coincide: witnesses can be found efficiently and the polynomial hierarchy collapses to P. In either world, P = NP holds exactly when SAT is in P.","assumptions":["Deterministic polynomial time; NP-completeness under polynomial-time many-one reductions.","Each region states a proved implication from its world's premise; the premises themselves are open."],"limitation":"The pictures are schematic: region sizes mean nothing, and neither world is asserted. The conditional statements are proved; which premise holds is the open problem.","author":"OpenMath curation","authoring_method":"ai_assisted_curation","authored_on":"2026-10-21","independent_review":"pending","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-equality:v1","pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","pnp-entry-inequality:v1","pnp-entry-ladner:v1","pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1","pnp-entry-np-search:v1","pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1"],"payload":{"kind":"possible_worlds","worlds":[{"id":"separate","label":"If P ≠ NP","premise":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"rings":[{"id":"np","label":"NP"},{"id":"np-complete","label":"NP-complete: outside P","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-complete-hard","version":2}},{"id":"intermediate","label":"NP-intermediate (Ladner)","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-ladner","version":2}},{"id":"p","label":"P"}],"consequences":[]},{"id":"equal","label":"If P = NP","premise":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"rings":[{"id":"all","label":"P = NP"}],"consequences":[{"id":"search","label":"Witnesses can be found efficiently","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-search","version":2}},{"id":"collapse","label":"The polynomial hierarchy collapses to P","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2}}]}],"shared":[{"id":"sat","label":"In either world: P = NP exactly when SAT is in P","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2}}]}},{"hash_profile":"rfc8785","schema_version":"visual-representation-v1","id":"p-vs-np-lower-bound-frontier","version":1,"subject":{"kind":"problem","id":"problem-p-vs-np","sha256":"ada323704b4bd6ac0704c10b7908ca602a83f0575dc15956aa531eed19d4d5e5"},"purpose":"setup","title":"How far circuit lower bounds reach","caption":"Proved lower bounds sit in restricted circuit models or for functions in classes much larger than NP. The target, superpolynomial general circuits for NP, is behind three proved barriers.","description":"Circuit models run from constant depth with counting gates (ACC⁰), through depth-two threshold circuits, to unrestricted Boolean circuits. Marks are proved lower bounds, each labelled with the class containing the hard function: NEXP against ACC⁰, E^NP against depth-two threshold circuits of size n^(2.5−ε), and an oracle class E^{prMA}/1 against general circuits of size Ω(2ⁿ/n). The open target is NP against general circuits of polynomial size, which would imply P ≠ NP. Relativizing, natural and algebrizing techniques provably cannot reach it.","assumptions":["Nonuniform Boolean circuit families; sizes as in each cited theorem.","A mark names the hard function's class; marks for different classes are not ordered against each other."],"limitation":"The horizontal order is by circuit model only. A mark further right is not a step towards NP: the hard functions belong to larger or oracle classes, and none of the marks transfers to NP. Barriers rule out techniques, not the statement.","author":"OpenMath curation","authoring_method":"ai_assisted_curation","authored_on":"2026-10-21","independent_review":"pending","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-algebrization:v1","pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","pnp-entry-relativization:v1","pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1"],"payload":{"kind":"frontier","axis_label":"Circuit model, weaker to stronger","models":[{"id":"acc","label":"ACC⁰ · constant depth"},{"id":"threshold","label":"Depth-two threshold"},{"id":"general","label":"General circuits"}],"marks":[{"id":"nexp-acc","model":"acc","label":"NEXP: no polynomial-size ACC⁰ circuits","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","version":2}},{"id":"enp-threshold","model":"threshold","label":"E^NP: size n^(2.5−ε) needed","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","version":2}},{"id":"oracle-general","model":"general","label":"E^{prMA}/1: size Ω(2ⁿ/n) needed","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-near-maximum-2026","version":2}}],"target":{"id":"np-general","model":"general","label":"NP: superpolynomial size needed (open)","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","version":2}},"barriers":[{"id":"relativization","label":"Relativization","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-relativization","version":2}},{"id":"natural","label":"Natural proofs","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","version":2}},{"id":"algebrization","label":"Algebrization","claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","version":2}}]}}],"visuals":[{"representation":{"id":"visual-p-vs-np-overview","version":3},"section":"connections"},{"representation":{"id":"p-vs-np-two-worlds","version":1},"section":"question"},{"representation":{"id":"p-vs-np-lower-bound-frontier","version":1},"section":"question"}],"claim_relations":[{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"relation":"primary_formulation","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-equality:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"alternative_answer","relationship_note":"Equality and inequality are competing answers to one question, not separate canonical Problems.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-inequality:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"answer","note":"Separation is the alternative answer to the same P versus NP question."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-in-p","version":2},"relation":"equivalent_formulation","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-sat-in-p:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2},"relation":"equivalent_formulation","relationship_note":"The equivalence is proved. Neither side is thereby resolved.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-sat-equivalence:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-np-circuits:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-circuits-imply-separation","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-circuits-imply-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"connection","note":"General NP circuit lower bounds suffice for separation; the reverse is not asserted."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-np-conp:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-conp-implies-separation","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-conp-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"connection","note":"P is closed under complementation, so separating NP and coNP would separate P and NP."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-karp-lipton","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-karp-lipton:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-ladner","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-ladner:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-one-way","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-one-way:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-owf-implies-separation","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-owf-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"connection","note":"Average-case one-wayness suffices for separation; separation alone does not give cryptographic hardness."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-eth:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth-implies-separation","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-eth-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"connection","note":"The stated exponential lower bound rules out polynomial time; separation alone does not establish ETH."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-vp-vnp:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"unproved","report_ids":["pnp-report-seth:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth-implies-separation","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-seth-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"connection","note":"The stated randomized hypothesis also excludes polynomial deterministic algorithms; no converse is asserted."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-relativization","version":2},"relation":"proof_barrier","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-relativization:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","version":2},"relation":"proof_barrier","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-natural-proofs:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","version":2},"relation":"proof_barrier","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-algebrization:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","version":2},"relation":"restricted_model_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-nexp-acc:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","version":2},"relation":"restricted_model_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-threshold-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-near-maximum-2026","version":2},"relation":"restricted_model_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-near-maximum-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-three-sum-2026","version":2},"relation":"adjacent_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-three-sum-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-apsp-2026","version":2},"relation":"adjacent_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-apsp-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-search","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-np-search:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-complete-hard","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-np-complete-hard:v1"],"independent_review":"pending","reading":{"placement":"consequence","note":"This follows from the definition of NP-completeness under the separation premise."}},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-ugc-proposal","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proposed","report_ids":["pnp-report-ugc-proposal:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-depth-three-proposal","version":2},"relation":"restricted_model_result","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proposed","report_ids":["pnp-report-depth-three-proposal:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-permanent-proposal","version":2},"relation":"related_variant","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proposed","report_ids":["pnp-report-permanent-proposal:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"}],"connections":[{"id":"pnp-connection-equality-sat-in-p","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-in-p","version":2},"relation":"equivalent_to","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2},"explanation":"SAT is an equivalent decision target: a deterministic polynomial-time SAT algorithm establishes P = NP.","limitation":"The equivalence is established; both target assertions remain unresolved.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-np-circuits-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"implies","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-circuits-imply-separation","version":2},"explanation":"Nonuniform general NP circuit lower bounds would suffice for P ≠ NP.","limitation":"The reverse implication is not established; restricted gates or larger target classes do not satisfy this premise.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-np-conp-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"implies","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-conp-implies-separation","version":2},"explanation":"Separating NP from coNP would also separate P from NP.","limitation":"The converse is not established; short proofs in one particular proof system are a narrower question.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-one-way-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-one-way","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"implies","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-owf-implies-separation","version":2},"explanation":"Average-case one-wayness is a stronger sufficient hardness premise.","limitation":"P ≠ NP alone does not establish one-way functions or the security of a particular cryptosystem.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-eth-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"implies","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-eth-implies-separation","version":2},"explanation":"ETH rules out even subexponential 3SAT algorithms in the stated model.","limitation":"P ≠ NP does not by itself establish exponential runtime lower bounds.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-seth-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"implies","assertion":{"id":"claim-pnp-seth-implies-separation","version":2},"explanation":"The cited randomized SETH excludes even fixed-base exponential improvements for some clause width, and therefore excludes polynomial deterministic algorithms.","limitation":"This version is stronger than deterministic SETH; neither is implied by P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-connection-vp-vnp-inequality","source":{"id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","version":2},"target":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"relation":"analogue_of","assertion":null,"explanation":"VP versus VNP is an algebraic complexity analogue, with field operations and polynomial families.","limitation":"No equivalence or implication to the classical Boolean question is asserted.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"}],"milestones":[{"id":"pnp-milestone-cook","date":{"value":"1971"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"foundation","title":"NP-completeness gives a common target","summary":"Cook’s NP-completeness theorem connects SAT to every NP language; Levin’s independent result was published in 1973.","limitation":"The reduction framework does not give an efficient SAT algorithm or a lower bound.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-ladner","date":{"value":"1975"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"foundation","title":"Conditional existence of intermediate problems","summary":"Ladner shows that, if P ≠ NP, NP contains languages outside both P and the NP-complete class.","limitation":"Existence does not settle the premise or classify particular natural candidates.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-ladner","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-ladner:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-bgs","date":{"value":"1975-12"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"proof_barrier","title":"Oracle worlds reveal a proof barrier","summary":"Baker, Gill and Solovay exhibit both equality and inequality with different oracles.","limitation":"Methods that relativize cannot decide the ordinary unrelativized question.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-relativization","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-relativization:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-natural","date":{"value":"1994"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"proof_barrier","title":"Natural proofs connect lower bounds to pseudorandomness","summary":"The STOC natural-proofs paper identifies constructivity, largeness and usefulness, with a conditional obstruction for general circuits.","limitation":"The strong pseudorandomness premise and exact notion of naturalness remain essential; the journal version appeared in 1997.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-alg","date":{"value":"2008"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"proof_barrier","title":"Algebrization identifies another method limitation","summary":"Aaronson and Wigderson define low-degree oracle extensions and show that resolving P versus NP requires techniques outside that framework.","limitation":"This is not a ban on algebraic reasoning; the journal version appeared in 2009.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-algebrization:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-acc","date":{"value":"2011"},"date_basis":"publication","category":"lower_bound","title":"Algorithms yield ACC circuit lower bounds","summary":"Williams proves NEXP is outside polynomial-size ACC using circuit-analysis algorithms.","limitation":"NEXP and ACC restrictions are essential; no NP lower bound for unrestricted circuits follows.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-threshold","date":{"value":"2026-03-15"},"date_basis":"preprint","category":"lower_bound","title":"A new depth-two threshold lower bound","summary":"Chen, Tal and Wang report n^{2.5−ε} threshold-circuit lower bounds for functions in E^NP.","limitation":"For each fixed ε the hard function can differ; E^NP is not NP.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-near-max","date":{"value":"2026-07-10"},"date_basis":"preprint","category":"lower_bound","title":"Near-maximum circuit hardness with an oracle and advice","summary":"Ren and Williams obtain Ω(2^n/n) circuit hardness in E^{prMA}/1.","limitation":"The promise oracle and one advice bit cannot be dropped from the displayed claim.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-near-maximum-2026","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-claude","date":{"value":"2026-10-05"},"date_basis":"preprint","category":"algorithm","title":"AI-assisted algorithms improve 3SUM and APSP","summary":"Alman and Vassilevska Williams report Claude-discovered algorithms and author-accountable proofs with linked Lean formalizations.","limitation":"Fine-grained speedups within polynomial time do not resolve P versus NP.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-three-sum-2026","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-apsp-2026","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},{"id":"pnp-milestone-openai","date":{"value":"2026-10-06"},"date_basis":"announcement","category":"proposal","title":"New AI-produced complexity proposals","summary":"OpenAI releases proposed gap reductions, depth-three bounds and algebraic determinantal bounds with scope documents and formal artifacts.","limitation":"The proposals have their own assessment; none is a general P versus NP resolution.","claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-ugc-proposal","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-depth-three-proposal","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-permanent-proposal","version":2}],"source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"}],"progress":[{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-relativization","aspect":"Limits of proof methods","summary":"Relativizing techniques cannot settle P versus NP.","remaining":"A limitation of relativizing proofs for the unrelativized question.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"proof_barrier"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","aspect":"Limits of proof methods","summary":"The natural-proofs barrier is conditional.","remaining":"A conditional barrier for this precise kind of circuit-lower-bound method; not for all mathematical proofs.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"proof_barrier"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","aspect":"Limits of proof methods","summary":"Algebrizing techniques cannot settle P versus NP.","remaining":"A proved limitation of a specified framework, not every algebraic method.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"proof_barrier"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","aspect":"Circuit lower bounds","summary":"NEXP is outside nonuniform polynomial-size ACC: constant-depth circuits with fixed-modulus counting gates.","remaining":"Nondeterministic exponential time versus restricted nonuniform circuits; not an NP lower bound against unrestricted circuits.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"restricted_model"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","aspect":"Circuit lower bounds","summary":"For each fixed ε > 0, an E^NP function needs depth-two threshold size n^{2.5−ε}; the function may depend on ε.","remaining":"The hard function may depend on ε; its class is E^NP, not NP.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"restricted_model"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-near-maximum-2026","aspect":"Circuit lower bounds","summary":"An E^{prMA}/1 function needs Ω(2^n/n) general Boolean circuit size, retaining its promise oracle and one advice bit.","remaining":"An oracle/advice class above the target NP; no general NP separation follows.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"restricted_model"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-circuits-imply-separation","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If NP is not contained in P/poly, then P ≠ NP.","remaining":"A one-direction sufficient condition; the converse is not established.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-conp-implies-separation","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If NP ≠ coNP, then P ≠ NP.","remaining":"The implication does not establish its premise.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-karp-lipton","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If NP is contained in P/poly, then PH = Σ₂^P.","remaining":"The Karp–Lipton implication; the circuit containment premise remains unresolved.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-ladner","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P ≠ NP, then some languages in NP are neither in P nor NP-complete under polynomial-time many-one reductions.","remaining":"Existence of NP-intermediate languages; not a classification of specific natural candidates.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-owf-implies-separation","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If standard one-way functions exist, then P ≠ NP.","remaining":"The reverse implication is not established; P ≠ NP alone is not a security guarantee.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-eth-implies-separation","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If ETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","remaining":"A sufficient stronger hardness hypothesis; P ≠ NP does not establish ETH.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-seth-implies-separation","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If the stated bounded-error randomized SETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","remaining":"Only a sufficient stronger premise; P ≠ NP gives no such exponent or randomized lower bound.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-np-search","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P = NP, then every polynomially balanced, polynomial-time-decidable witness relation admits polynomial-time witness search or correct reporting that no witness exists.","remaining":"An asymptotic search consequence for these relations; output length and encoding restrictions matter.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","remaining":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-np-complete-hard","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P ≠ NP, every NP-complete decision language is outside P.","remaining":"Rules out uniform polynomial-time algorithms, not efficient restricted-instance methods or heuristics.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-three-sum-2026","aspect":"Fine-grained algorithms","summary":"Deterministic 3SUM in O(n^{1.9992}) for polynomially bounded integers, in the cited integer-operation model.","remaining":"A fine-grained improvement for a problem already solvable in polynomial time; no SAT speedup or P versus NP resolution is claimed.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"adjacent_advance"},{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-apsp-2026","aspect":"Fine-grained algorithms","summary":"Deterministic APSP in O(n^{2.9995}) for fixed polynomial integer-weight bounds and no negative cycles.","remaining":"A fine-grained algorithmic improvement within polynomial time; real-weight and randomized variants have separate guarantees.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"adjacent_advance"}],"activities":[{"id":"pnp-activity-aletheia","title":"Robust MDP policy iteration and Aletheia contribution","kind":"research_direction","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-activity-aletheia:v1"],"summary":"Aletheia supplies an effective strengthening of a combinatorial bound used in robust-MDP context; the authors’ preceding theorem already suffices.","limitation":"The algorithmic scope fixes L∞ uncertainty and a constant discount factor; the AI contribution is an intermediate theorem, not P versus NP.","related_claim_ids":[]},{"id":"pnp-activity-gpt4","title":"Dong et al. · Large language model for science: P vs NP","kind":"research_direction","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-activity-gpt4:v1"],"summary":"The authors report a GPT-4-produced proposed P ≠ NP proof schema.","limitation":"This research-workflow report is not an accepted proof, a formal check or a resolution of the canonical assertion.","related_claim_ids":["claim-pnp-inequality"]}],"curation":{"checked_on":"2026-10-10","selection":"Selected P versus NP foundations, conditional implications, circuit lower bounds, proof barriers, related algorithmic advances and recent AI proposals. The timeline is selected, not exhaustive.","search_scope":"Clay/Cook; Wigderson’s author text; original relativization, natural-proofs and algebrization papers; Williams; Impagliazzo–Paturi; March and July 2026 primary lower-bound reports; October 2026 algorithm and provider releases; Aletheia and earlier GPT-4 research. Mathematical locators and scope documents were inspected; no novelty or exhaustive-coverage certification is claimed.","formal_status":"External author/provider formalization links and their stated scope are included. No OpenMath execution, semantic alignment audit or independent reproduction is asserted.","ai_status":"Discovery, intermediate theorem contribution and formalization are attributed separately where disclosed. OpenAI proposals and the earlier GPT-4 proof schema do not alter the general status. Not-reported AI involvement does not mean none occurred.","independent_review":"pending"},"schema_version":"research-record-v3","claims":[{"statement":"Every language in NP is decidable by a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm.","id":"claim-pnp-equality","slug":"pnp-equality","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"P = NP","assumptions":["Finite binary inputs; uniform classical computation; polynomial time in bit length."],"scope":"The affirmative answer to the canonical question.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-equality:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"There exists a language in NP that is not decidable by any deterministic polynomial-time algorithm.","id":"claim-pnp-inequality","slug":"pnp-inequality","version":3,"kind":"conjecture","title":"P ≠ NP","assumptions":["Finite binary inputs; uniform classical computation; polynomial time in bit length."],"scope":"The conjectural negative answer to the same canonical question.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-inequality:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"Boolean satisfiability has a uniform deterministic polynomial-time decision algorithm.","id":"claim-pnp-sat-in-p","slug":"pnp-sat-in-p","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"SAT in polynomial time","assumptions":["Boolean formula encoding; input length includes the formula."],"scope":"The SAT decision target; presently unresolved.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"P = NP if and only if SAT is in P.","id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","slug":"pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2,"kind":"equivalence","title":"SAT captures P versus NP","assumptions":["Polynomial-time many-one reductions; SAT is NP-complete."],"scope":"An established equivalence between two unresolved assertions.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"NP is not contained in P/poly.","id":"claim-pnp-np-circuits","slug":"pnp-np-circuits","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"NP lacks polynomial-size general circuits","assumptions":["Nonuniform families of polynomial-size unrestricted Boolean circuits."],"scope":"A stronger circuit-complexity target than P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If NP is not contained in P/poly, then P ≠ NP.","id":"claim-pnp-circuits-imply-separation","slug":"pnp-circuits-imply-separation","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"General NP circuit lower bounds would separate P and NP","assumptions":["Uniform polynomial-time algorithms have polynomial-size nonuniform circuits."],"scope":"A one-direction sufficient condition; the converse is not established.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"NP and coNP are distinct.","id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","slug":"pnp-np-conp","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"NP ≠ coNP","assumptions":["Classical NP and complements of NP languages."],"scope":"A stronger related separation; not equivalent to P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-conp:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If NP ≠ coNP, then P ≠ NP.","id":"claim-pnp-conp-implies-separation","slug":"pnp-conp-implies-separation","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"NP versus coNP would separate P and NP","assumptions":["P is closed under complementation."],"scope":"The implication does not establish its premise.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If NP is contained in P/poly, then PH = Σ₂^P.","id":"claim-pnp-karp-lipton","slug":"pnp-karp-lipton","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Polynomial NP circuits would collapse the hierarchy","assumptions":["Nonuniform polynomial-size Boolean circuits for NP; the classical polynomial hierarchy."],"scope":"The Karp–Lipton implication; the circuit containment premise remains unresolved.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-karp-lipton:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If P ≠ NP, then some languages in NP are neither in P nor NP-complete under polynomial-time many-one reductions.","id":"claim-pnp-ladner","slug":"pnp-ladner","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P ≠ NP, intermediate problems exist","assumptions":["P ≠ NP; polynomial-time many-one completeness."],"scope":"Existence of NP-intermediate languages; not a classification of specific natural candidates.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-ladner:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"There exists a polynomial-time-computable function that is hard to invert on average for probabilistic polynomial-time algorithms.","id":"claim-pnp-one-way","slug":"pnp-one-way","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"Standard one-way functions exist","assumptions":["The standard asymptotic cryptographic definition, efficient sampling and polynomially bounded encodings."],"scope":"Average-case cryptographic hardness; stronger than merely worst-case NP hardness.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-one-way:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If standard one-way functions exist, then P ≠ NP.","id":"claim-pnp-owf-implies-separation","slug":"pnp-owf-implies-separation","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"One-way functions would separate P and NP","assumptions":["Standard polynomially bounded one-way functions; classical polynomial-time computation."],"scope":"The reverse implication is not established; P ≠ NP alone is not a security guarantee.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"3SAT cannot be decided in deterministic time 2^{o(n)} times a polynomial in the input length, where n is the number of variables.","id":"claim-pnp-eth","slug":"pnp-eth","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"Exponential Time Hypothesis","assumptions":["Classical deterministic algorithms; finite CNF input; parameter is variables, not encoded bit length."],"scope":"A stronger quantitative hypothesis than P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-eth:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If ETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","id":"claim-pnp-eth-implies-separation","slug":"pnp-eth-implies-separation","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"ETH would separate P and NP","assumptions":["ETH in the stated variable-parameter deterministic model; 3SAT is NP-complete."],"scope":"A sufficient stronger hardness hypothesis; P ≠ NP does not establish ETH.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"Over a field of characteristic zero, VP and VNP are distinct.","id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","slug":"pnp-vp-vnp","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"VP versus VNP","assumptions":["Polynomial families with polynomially bounded degree; nonuniform algebraic circuits; arithmetic operation complexity over the field."],"scope":"An algebraic analogue; no equivalence to Boolean P versus NP is asserted.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For every fixed α in (0,1), there is a fixed clause width k such that k-CNF-SAT on n variables has no bounded-error randomized O(2^{αn})-time algorithm.","id":"claim-pnp-seth","slug":"pnp-seth","version":2,"kind":"conjecture","title":"Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis — randomized version","assumptions":["The bounded-error randomized convention explicitly used in Cygan et al., §1; width k depends on α.","Parameter is the number of variables; fixed-width formulas can be normalized to polynomial input length."],"scope":"A fine-grained hardness premise stronger than the deterministic version; neither version follows from P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-seth:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If the stated bounded-error randomized SETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","id":"claim-pnp-seth-implies-separation","slug":"pnp-seth-implies-separation","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Randomized SETH would separate P and NP","assumptions":["The stated SETH formulation; deterministic algorithms are a special case of bounded-error randomized algorithms; fixed-width SAT is in NP."],"scope":"Only a sufficient stronger premise; P ≠ NP gives no such exponent or randomized lower bound.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"There are recursive oracles A and B with P^A = NP^A and P^B ≠ NP^B.","id":"claim-pnp-relativization","slug":"pnp-relativization","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Relativizing techniques cannot settle P versus NP","assumptions":["Both machine classes receive the same unit-cost oracle-query mechanism."],"scope":"A limitation of relativizing proofs for the unrelativized question.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-relativization:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If a polynomial-size pseudorandom generator G_k: {0,1}^k → {0,1}^{2k} has hardness H(G_k) ≥ 2^{k^ε} for some fixed ε > 0 and all sufficiently large k, then no P-natural property useful against P/poly exists.","id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","slug":"pnp-natural-proofs","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"The natural-proofs barrier is conditional","assumptions":["Constructivity: the property is decidable in time polynomial in the truth-table length.","Largeness: at least a 2^{-O(n)} fraction of n-input Boolean functions has the property.","Usefulness against polynomial-size general Boolean circuits; the stated strong generator premise. H(G_k) is the least S permitting a size-at-most-S circuit to distinguish generator output from uniform with advantage greater than 1/S."],"scope":"A conditional barrier for this precise kind of circuit-lower-bound method; not for all mathematical proofs.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"Resolving P versus NP requires non-algebrizing techniques in the Aaronson–Wigderson oracle-extension framework.","id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","slug":"pnp-algebrization","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Algebrizing techniques cannot settle P versus NP","assumptions":["Algebrization as defined in §2; Boolean oracles and their low-degree extensions with the source’s asymmetric access conventions."],"scope":"A proved limitation of a specified framework, not every algebraic method.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-algebrization:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"NEXP is not contained in nonuniform polynomial-size ACC.","id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","slug":"pnp-nexp-acc","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"NEXP has no polynomial-size ACC circuits","assumptions":["Constant circuit depth; unbounded fan-in AND, OR, NOT and MOD_m gates for a fixed integer m > 1."],"scope":"Nondeterministic exponential time versus restricted nonuniform circuits; not an NP lower bound against unrestricted circuits.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For every fixed ε in (0,1), there exists a function f in E^NP not computable by depth-two THR∘THR circuits of size n^{2.5−ε}; the same holds for SYM∘THR.","id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","slug":"pnp-threshold-2026","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Depth-two threshold circuits require superquadratic size","assumptions":["ε is fixed; circuit size counts gates under the paper’s convention; arbitrary linear threshold gates."],"scope":"The hard function may depend on ε; its class is E^NP, not NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"There exists a function in E^{prMA}/1 requiring Boolean circuits of size Ω(2^n/n).","id":"claim-pnp-near-maximum-2026","slug":"pnp-near-maximum-2026","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Near-maximum general circuit lower bound in an oracle class","assumptions":["Deterministic exponential time with a promise-MA oracle; one bit of advice; the algorithm queries promised instances on the correct advice bit."],"scope":"An oracle/advice class above the target NP; no general NP separation follows.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For every fixed ν, 3SUM on n integers with absolute value at most n^ν has a deterministic O(n^{1.9992})-time algorithm in the paper’s integer-operation model.","id":"claim-pnp-three-sum-2026","slug":"pnp-three-sum-2026","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"A truly subquadratic deterministic 3SUM algorithm","assumptions":["Polynomially bounded integers; fixed ν; the algorithm and model of Theorem 22 and Corollary 26."],"scope":"A fine-grained improvement for a problem already solvable in polynomial time; no SAT speedup or P versus NP resolution is claimed.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For every fixed ν, all-pairs shortest paths on directed n-vertex graphs with integer edge weights of absolute value at most n^ν and no negative cycles can be computed deterministically in O(n^{2.9995}) time.","id":"claim-pnp-apsp-2026","slug":"pnp-apsp-2026","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"A truly subcubic deterministic APSP algorithm","assumptions":["Fixed polynomial weight bound; directed graphs with no negative cycles; the integer-operation model of Theorem 22."],"scope":"A fine-grained algorithmic improvement within polynomial time; real-weight and randomized variants have separate guarantees.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If P = NP, then every polynomially balanced, polynomial-time-decidable witness relation admits polynomial-time witness search or correct reporting that no witness exists.","id":"claim-pnp-np-search","slug":"pnp-np-search","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P = NP, NP witnesses can be found efficiently","assumptions":["Polynomial witness length and checkable relation; binary encodings; prefix queries are languages in NP."],"scope":"An asymptotic search consequence for these relations; output length and encoding restrictions matter.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-search:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","slug":"pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P = NP, the polynomial hierarchy collapses to P","assumptions":["The classical finite-level polynomial hierarchy and deterministic polynomial time."],"scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"If P ≠ NP, every NP-complete decision language is outside P.","id":"claim-pnp-np-complete-hard","slug":"pnp-np-complete-hard","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P ≠ NP, NP-complete problems have no polynomial algorithm","assumptions":["Polynomial-time many-one NP-completeness; worst-case classical deterministic computation."],"scope":"Rules out uniform polynomial-time algorithms, not efficient restricted-instance methods or heuristics.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For every fixed ε, δ in (0,1/2), there is a deterministic polynomial-time reduction from binary 3SAT to unique games over a fixed alphabet, with completeness at least 1−ε and soundness at most δ.","id":"claim-pnp-ugc-proposal","slug":"pnp-ugc-proposal","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"Proposed Unique Games gap reductions","assumptions":["Alphabet depends on ε and δ; translation constraints in the provider’s formalization scope."],"scope":"Provider proposal for Unique Games hardness; a hardness reduction does not prove P ≠ NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"A fixed language in P requires more than 2^{A√n} depth-three OR–AND–OR gates for every fixed A > 0, at every sufficiently large input length.","id":"claim-pnp-depth-three-proposal","slug":"pnp-depth-three-proposal","version":2,"kind":"bound","title":"Proposed depth-three bound beyond the square-root exponent","assumptions":["Unbounded finite fan-in and sharing; free input negations and constants; total gate count; exact computation."],"scope":"Restricted depth only; not a fixed n^{1/2+ε} exponent and not unrestricted circuits.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]},{"statement":"For m ≥ 1408, every affine-linear determinant representation, including coefficientwise limits, of the complex m×m permanent has size at least m^3/(5529600e).","id":"claim-pnp-permanent-proposal","slug":"pnp-permanent-proposal","version":2,"kind":"bound","title":"Proposed cubic complex determinantal lower bound","assumptions":["Complex numbers; exact and border affine-linear determinantal representations."],"scope":"A proposed bound in an algebraic model; does not separate VP from VNP or Boolean P from NP.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1"],"formal_declarations":[]}],"problem":{"resolution_scope":{"resolution":"unresolved","extent":"general_case","summary":"The general question remains open. Known restricted-model lower bounds, proof barriers and conditional implications explain the frontier; related faster algorithms do not settle P versus NP.","report_ids":["pnp-report-general-status:v2"],"progress_claim_ids":[],"remaining":"No general deterministic polynomial-time algorithm for SAT, and no proof that an NP language requires superpolynomial deterministic time, is established by this selected curation."},"statement_kind":"question","problem_id":"problem-p-vs-np","slug":"p-vs-np","title":"P versus NP","question":"Can every decision problem with polynomially bounded, polynomial-time-checkable certificates also be decided in deterministic polynomial time?","scope":"Uniform classical deterministic computation on finite binary inputs, with worst-case polynomial time in input bit length. NP certificates have polynomial length. Randomized, quantum, nonuniform, average-case and restricted-circuit questions have their own scopes.","aliases":["P = NP","P != NP"],"fields":["Theoretical computer science"],"msc":["68Q15"],"topics":["Computational complexity","NP-completeness","Circuit lower bounds","Proof barriers","Fine-grained complexity"],"background":"undergraduate","scale":"major conjecture","depth":"source-linked","source_entry_ids":["p-vs-np:entry:0:v1","pnp-entry-general-status:v1","pnp-entry-equality:v1","pnp-entry-inequality:v1","pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1","pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","pnp-entry-np-conp:v1","pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-karp-lipton:v1","pnp-entry-ladner:v1","pnp-entry-one-way:v1","pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-eth:v1","pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1","pnp-entry-seth:v1","pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-relativization:v1","pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","pnp-entry-algebrization:v1","pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1","pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1","pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1","pnp-entry-np-search:v1","pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1","pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1","pnp-entry-activity-aletheia:v1","pnp-entry-activity-gpt4:v1"],"status_report_ids":["p-vs-np:report:0:v1","pnp-report-general-status:v2"],"editorial":null,"literature":[],"formalizations":[],"related":[],"tasks":[],"insights":[{"id":"pnp-insight-settlement:v1","title":"What would settle this question?","summary":"A deterministic polynomial-time algorithm for SAT establishes equality. Proving any language in NP is outside P establishes inequality. These are two possible answers to the same question.","review":"pending","kind":"interpretation","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","pnp-entry-inequality:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-sat-equivalence","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3}],"limitation":"A restricted circuit lower bound, successful finite experiment or new hardness reduction does not meet either criterion."},{"id":"pnp-insight-scope:v1","title":"Checking, finding and practical efficiency","summary":"NP means nondeterministic polynomial time, not “non-polynomial.” Certificates have polynomial length. The question concerns all input lengths and worst-case guarantees; fixed-size puzzles and benchmark performance have narrower scopes.","review":"pending","kind":"interpretation","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-equality:v1","pnp-entry-np-search:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-np-search","version":2}],"limitation":"Even polynomial time may have impractical exponents or constants. Quantum, average-case and nonuniform models are different questions."},{"id":"pnp-insight-circuits:v1","title":"Circuit lower bounds and algorithmic methods","summary":"A polynomial-time algorithm has polynomial-size circuits. General NP circuit lower bounds would suffice, while Williams’ algorithmic method has delivered lower bounds in restricted circuits for larger classes.","review":"pending","kind":"approach","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-circuits-imply-separation","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-nexp-acc","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-threshold-2026","version":2}],"limitation":"Moving to unrestricted circuits and a target in NP is a substantive missing step."},{"id":"pnp-insight-barriers:v1","title":"Understand which proof properties encounter barriers","summary":"Relativization, natural proofs and algebrization identify precise limitations. They help diagnose a proposed method, with the natural-proofs obstruction additionally depending on strong pseudorandomness.","review":"pending","kind":"approach","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-relativization:v1","pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","pnp-entry-algebrization:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-relativization","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-natural-proofs","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-algebrization","version":2}],"limitation":"These are not universal impossibility results for all proof methods; avoiding a barrier does not itself prove a separation."},{"id":"pnp-insight-algebraic:v1","title":"Algebraic and proof-complexity routes","summary":"VP versus VNP studies polynomial families under arithmetic computation. NP versus coNP motivates proof-complexity routes. Both connect to the Boolean question through specific scopes rather than shared names.","review":"pending","kind":"approach","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1","pnp-entry-np-conp:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-vp-vnp","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-np-conp","version":2}],"limitation":"A result for one arithmetic representation or one propositional proof system does not automatically settle either general separation."},{"id":"pnp-insight-search-impact:v1","title":"Optimization and witness search","summary":"If P = NP, polynomially bounded NP witnesses can be found in polynomial time. This applies to suitably encoded search tasks and exact optimization reducible to polynomially many such decision queries.","review":"pending","kind":"impact","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-search:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-np-search","version":2}],"scenario":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"limitation":"Output-size and encoding assumptions matter; the existence theorem does not provide a usable implementation or small runtime constants."},{"id":"pnp-insight-security-impact:v1","title":"Cryptographic hardness assumptions","summary":"If P = NP, standard one-way functions cannot exist: their inversion witnesses would become polynomial-time searchable. This changes the asymptotic assumptions supporting computational cryptography.","review":"pending","kind":"impact","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","pnp-entry-np-search:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-owf-implies-separation","version":2},{"id":"claim-pnp-np-search","version":2}],"scenario":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"limitation":"An equality proof alone does not predict immediate attacks, engineering cost, or the fate of information-theoretic security. P ≠ NP alone does not establish average-case security."},{"id":"pnp-insight-hierarchy-impact:v1","title":"Several levels of verification collapse","summary":"If P = NP, the classical polynomial hierarchy collapses to P, connecting nested existential and universal verification tasks to deterministic polynomial time.","review":"pending","kind":"impact","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2}],"scenario":{"id":"claim-pnp-equality","version":2},"limitation":"This consequence concerns the defined hierarchy; exact counting, arbitrary mathematical truth and practical runtimes are separate questions."},{"id":"pnp-insight-hardness-impact:v1","title":"Worst-case limits guide algorithm design","summary":"If P ≠ NP, NP-complete decision problems admit no uniform deterministic polynomial-time algorithms. Restricted instances, approximation, parameterization and heuristics still have meaningful roles.","review":"pending","kind":"impact","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1"],"claims":[{"id":"claim-pnp-np-complete-hard","version":2}],"scenario":{"id":"claim-pnp-inequality","version":3},"limitation":"This is a worst-case asymptotic statement; it does not say every instance is hard or that a particular deployed cryptosystem is secure."}],"coverage_gaps":["Selected authoritative foundations and recent primary reports; not a complete history or exhaustive literature survey.","Independent mathematical and logical-relationship review is pending.","External Lean code is linked as external evidence; OpenMath has not executed or independently reproduced it.","Restricted-model results and adjacent algorithms are not counted as direct partial resolution; no percentage solved or best-known ranking is inferred."],"checked_on":"2026-10-10"},"sources":[{"id":"clay-millennium@observed-2026-10-01","source_id":"clay-millennium","title":"Clay · Millennium Problems","owner":"Clay Mathematics Institute","url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium-problems/","subject_scope":"Seven Millennium Prize Problems; five selected here","revision":"observed-2026-10-01","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual checked import; new observations require staff preview and publication","identifier_policy":"Canonical source URL plus explicit item/declaration locator; no fuzzy identity merge","observed_on":"2026-10-01","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Not established; links and OpenMath paraphrases only","terms_url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium-problems/","attribution":"Clay Mathematics Institute","rights_note":"Store metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases; follow the original source for authoritative wording.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Clay Mathematics Institute"],"kind":"research_project","publication":"project","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[]},"id":"pnp-clay@observed-2026-10-10","source_id":"pnp-clay","title":"Clay · P versus NP","owner":"Clay Mathematics Institute","url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"observed-2026-10-10","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","attribution":"Clay Mathematics Institute","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Stephen Cook"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Stephen Cook · The P versus NP problem — proof text","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","version":"official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"018f3d473d16c35e807e8cdfbd0bed3ccf7a56452e3e10c6b1d84b56eaf2cf59"}]},"id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","source_id":"pnp-cook","title":"Stephen Cook · The P versus NP problem","owner":"Stephen Cook","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","content_sha256":"018f3d473d16c35e807e8cdfbd0bed3ccf7a56452e3e10c6b1d84b56eaf2cf59","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","attribution":"Stephen Cook","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Avi Wigderson"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation — proof text","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","version":"author-draft-2019-08-06","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829"}],"published":{"value":"2019"}},"id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_id":"pnp-book","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","owner":"Avi Wigderson","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"author-draft-2019-08-06","content_sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","attribution":"Avi Wigderson","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Theodore Baker","John Gill","Robert Solovay"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[],"published":{"value":"1975-12"}},"id":"pnp-bgs@doi-10.1137/0204037-abstract-observed-2026-10-10","source_id":"pnp-bgs","title":"Baker–Gill–Solovay · Relativizations of the P =? NP question","owner":"Theodore Baker; John Gill; Robert Solovay","url":"https://doi.org/10.1137/0204037","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"doi-10.1137/0204037-abstract-observed-2026-10-10","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://doi.org/10.1137/0204037","attribution":"Theodore Baker; John Gill; Robert Solovay","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Alexander Razborov","Steven Rudich"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Razborov–Rudich · Natural proofs — proof text","url":"https://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/BLOGPAPERS/natural.pdf","version":"STOC-1994-author-paper","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"493cd619b123213f23de32f5075f34d30c563cbd562e025c99b0207568bc1c58"}],"published":{"value":"1994"}},"id":"pnp-rr@STOC-1994-author-paper","source_id":"pnp-rr","title":"Razborov–Rudich · Natural proofs","owner":"Alexander Razborov; Steven Rudich","url":"https://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/BLOGPAPERS/natural.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"STOC-1994-author-paper","content_sha256":"493cd619b123213f23de32f5075f34d30c563cbd562e025c99b0207568bc1c58","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/BLOGPAPERS/natural.pdf","attribution":"Alexander Razborov; Steven Rudich","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Scott Aaronson","Avi Wigderson"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[],"published":{"value":"2008"}},"id":"pnp-aw@author-conference-version-observed-2026-10-10","source_id":"pnp-aw","title":"Aaronson–Wigderson · Algebrization","owner":"Scott Aaronson; Avi Wigderson","url":"https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/alg.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"author-conference-version-observed-2026-10-10","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/alg.pdf","attribution":"Scott Aaronson; Avi Wigderson","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Ryan Williams"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Ryan Williams · Non-uniform ACC circuit lower bounds — proof text","url":"https://people.csail.mit.edu/rrw/acc-lbs-ccc.pdf","version":"CCC-2011-author-version","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"91a09d1ea06fab97e26a791010fd4a902d4be30675998e5bd5e9f8bf68389f80"}],"published":{"value":"2011"}},"id":"pnp-williams@CCC-2011-author-version","source_id":"pnp-williams","title":"Ryan Williams · Non-uniform ACC circuit lower bounds","owner":"Ryan Williams","url":"https://people.csail.mit.edu/rrw/acc-lbs-ccc.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"CCC-2011-author-version","content_sha256":"91a09d1ea06fab97e26a791010fd4a902d4be30675998e5bd5e9f8bf68389f80","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://people.csail.mit.edu/rrw/acc-lbs-ccc.pdf","attribution":"Ryan Williams","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Russell Impagliazzo","Ramamohan Paturi"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Impagliazzo–Paturi · On the complexity of k-SAT — proof text","url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","version":"JCSS-2001","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"1b7d20af963735666020e844f8a454fbb64893a5f3b3c488c99d1f4bdae5c11c"}],"published":{"value":"2001-03"}},"id":"pnp-eth@JCSS-2001","source_id":"pnp-eth","title":"Impagliazzo–Paturi · On the complexity of k-SAT","owner":"Russell Impagliazzo; Ramamohan Paturi","url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"JCSS-2001","content_sha256":"1b7d20af963735666020e844f8a454fbb64893a5f3b3c488c99d1f4bdae5c11c","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","attribution":"Russell Impagliazzo; Ramamohan Paturi","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Lijie Chen","Avishay Tal","Yichuan Wang"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"preprint","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Chen–Tal–Wang · Depth-two threshold lower bounds — proof text","url":"https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2026/039/download","version":"ECCC-TR26-039-observed-2026-10-10","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"b461919916161705a41f43866538d954bd100ca1d4c89451ba734d1caff9987d"}],"published":{"value":"2026-03-15"}},"id":"pnp-ctw@ECCC-TR26-039-observed-2026-10-10","source_id":"pnp-ctw","title":"Chen–Tal–Wang · Depth-two threshold lower bounds","owner":"Lijie Chen; Avishay Tal; Yichuan Wang","url":"https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2026/039/download","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"ECCC-TR26-039-observed-2026-10-10","content_sha256":"b461919916161705a41f43866538d954bd100ca1d4c89451ba734d1caff9987d","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2026/039/download","attribution":"Lijie Chen; Avishay Tal; Yichuan Wang","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Hanlin Ren","Ryan Williams"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"preprint","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Ren–Williams · Near-maximum circuit lower bounds — proof text","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09963v1","version":"arXiv-2607.09963v1","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"d8f22d2adb4008ac80f0e31c27ffe4025c086e52859978e8e5ce678bc1765b51"}],"published":{"value":"2026-07-10"}},"id":"pnp-ren@arXiv-2607.09963v1","source_id":"pnp-ren","title":"Ren–Williams · Near-maximum circuit lower bounds","owner":"Hanlin Ren; Ryan Williams","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09963v1","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"arXiv-2607.09963v1","content_sha256":"d8f22d2adb4008ac80f0e31c27ffe4025c086e52859978e8e5ce678bc1765b51","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09963v1","attribution":"Hanlin Ren; Ryan Williams","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Josh Alman","Virginia Vassilevska Williams"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"preprint","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"self_reported","ai_note":"The authors credit an internal Anthropic Claude model with algorithm discovery and later Lean formalization. They describe their simplification, strengthening, extensions and mathematical responsibility.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Alman–Vassilevska Williams · Truly subquadratic 3SUM and subcubic APSP — proof text","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","version":"arXiv-2610.06783v1","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"d91a79c5dbf1fc662f0c5c1bb2b690ac3d83d9ef5bf872bde4cdaf7cc9e76005"},{"kind":"formal_code","title":"Reported Lean formalization of the main algorithmic results","url":"https://github.com/anthropics/formal-math/tree/e1a4e6508154ea59f030480661590a9fe3018011/3sum-apsp","version":"e1a4e6508154ea59f030480661590a9fe3018011","assessment":"external_report","note":"The authors report Lean certification. The linked snapshot is pinned to the latest path commit observed by 10 October 2026. No local compilation, statement-alignment audit or independent reproduction is asserted by OpenMath."}],"published":{"value":"2026-10-05"}},"id":"pnp-claude@arXiv-2610.06783v1","source_id":"pnp-claude","title":"Alman–Vassilevska Williams · Truly subquadratic 3SUM and subcubic APSP","owner":"Josh Alman; Virginia Vassilevska Williams","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"arXiv-2610.06783v1","content_sha256":"d91a79c5dbf1fc662f0c5c1bb2b690ac3d83d9ef5bf872bde4cdaf7cc9e76005","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","attribution":"Josh Alman; Virginia Vassilevska Williams","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["OpenAI internal model; author attribution per manuscript"],"kind":"research_project","publication":"project","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"self_reported","ai_note":"OpenAI reports internal-model production and accompanying formalizations at mixed stages of assessment. These Claims remain proposed in this curation; external formal evidence does not become an OpenMath check.","artifacts":[{"kind":"project_notes","title":"Unique Games gap reductions — formalization scope","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/102.md","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider scope document and comparator links. OpenMath has not executed the code or independently reviewed the mathematical correspondence."},{"kind":"project_notes","title":"Depth-three circuit lower bound — formalization scope","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/112.md","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider scope document and comparator links. OpenMath has not executed the code or independently reviewed the mathematical correspondence."},{"kind":"project_notes","title":"Complex permanent determinantal lower bound — formalization scope","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/108.md","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider scope document and comparator links. OpenMath has not executed the code or independently reviewed the mathematical correspondence."},{"kind":"pdf","title":"Unique Games proposal — manuscript","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/The-Unique-Games-Theorem-September-23-2026/paper.pdf","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider manuscript; the proposed result has not received independent OpenMath mathematical review. See the matching formalization scope document separately."},{"kind":"pdf","title":"Depth-three proposal — manuscript","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/Beyond-the-Square-Root-Exponent-for-Depth-Three-Boolean-Circuits-September-23-2026/main.pdf","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider manuscript; the proposed result has not received independent OpenMath mathematical review. See the matching formalization scope document separately."},{"kind":"pdf","title":"Permanent proposal — manuscript","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/preprints/A-cubic-lower-bound-for-border-determinantal-complexity-of-the-permanent-September-24-2026/A-cubic-lower-bound-for-border-determinantal-complexity-of-the-permanent-September-24-2026.pdf","version":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","assessment":"external_report","note":"Pinned provider manuscript; the proposed result has not received independent OpenMath mathematical review. See the matching formalization scope document separately."}],"published":{"value":"2026-10-06"}},"id":"pnp-openai@fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","source_id":"pnp-openai","title":"OpenAI · Mathematics release: complexity proposals","owner":"OpenAI internal model; author attribution per manuscript","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/tree/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://github.com/openai/math/tree/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","attribution":"OpenAI internal model; author attribution per manuscript","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Ali Asadi","Krishnendu Chatterjee","Ehsan Goharshady","Mehrdad Karrabi","Alipasha Montaseri","Carlo Pagano"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"accepted","publication_note":"The authors report acceptance at COLT 2026; this citation pins arXiv:2601.23229v2, dated 2 June 2026. Independent OpenMath assessment is pending.","ai_role":"self_reported","ai_note":"The source credits Aletheia/Gemini Deep Think with an effective strengthening, Theorem 21, of an intermediate combinatorial result; the authors’ Theorem 20 already suffices for their complexity analysis.","artifacts":[],"published":{"value":"2026"}},"id":"pnp-aletheia@arXiv-2601.23229v2","source_id":"pnp-aletheia","title":"Robust MDP policy iteration and Aletheia contribution","owner":"Ali Asadi; Krishnendu Chatterjee; Ehsan Goharshady; Mehrdad Karrabi; Alipasha Montaseri; Carlo Pagano","url":"https://arxiv.org/html/2601.23229v2","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"arXiv-2601.23229v2","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://arxiv.org/html/2601.23229v2","attribution":"Ali Asadi; Krishnendu Chatterjee; Ehsan Goharshady; Mehrdad Karrabi; Alipasha Montaseri; Carlo Pagano","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Qingxiu Dong","Li Dong","Ke Xu","Guangyan Zhou","Yaru Hao","Zhifang Sui","Furu Wei"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"preprint","publication_note":"Source-reported preprint/project; independent mathematical assessment pending.","ai_role":"self_reported","ai_note":"The authors report a GPT-4 dialogue producing a proposed P ≠ NP proof schema. A dialogue and self-evaluation are not an accepted proof or independent verification.","artifacts":[],"published":{"value":"2023-09-11"}},"id":"pnp-gpt4@arXiv-2309.05689v1","source_id":"pnp-gpt4","title":"Dong et al. · Large language model for science: P vs NP","owner":"Qingxiu Dong; Li Dong; Ke Xu; Guangyan Zhou; Yaru Hao; Zhifang Sui; Furu Wei","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.05689v1","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"arXiv-2309.05689v1","content_sha256":null,"update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.05689v1","attribution":"Qingxiu Dong; Li Dong; Ke Xu; Guangyan Zhou; Yaru Hao; Zhifang Sui; Furu Wei","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30},{"work":{"authors":["Marek Cygan","Holger Dell","Daniel Lokshtanov","Dániel Marx","Jesper Nederlof","Yoshio Okamoto","Ramamohan Paturi","Saket Saurabh","Magnus Wahlström"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"preprint","publication_note":"Author full version dated March 2014; an extended abstract appeared at CCC 2012. The paper explicitly uses a bounded-error randomized formulation of SETH.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Cygan et al. · On problems as hard as CNF-SAT — proof text","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","version":"arXiv-1112.2275v3","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"292ff4c93c0834d4eb560ad0f30b6b703a972901682d5af65b65afcd4c4b0ff1"}],"published":{"value":"2014-03-27"}},"id":"pnp-seth@arXiv-1112.2275v3","source_id":"pnp-seth","title":"Cygan et al. · On problems as hard as CNF-SAT","owner":"Marek Cygan; Holger Dell; Daniel Lokshtanov; Dániel Marx; Jesper Nederlof; Yoshio Okamoto; Ramamohan Paturi; Saket Saurabh; Magnus Wahlström","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"arXiv-1112.2275v3","content_sha256":"292ff4c93c0834d4eb560ad0f30b6b703a972901682d5af65b65afcd4c4b0ff1","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","attribution":"Marek Cygan; Holger Dell; Daniel Lokshtanov; Dániel Marx; Jesper Nederlof; Yoshio Okamoto; Ramamohan Paturi; Saket Saurabh; Magnus Wahlström","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30}],"entries":[{"id":"p-vs-np:entry:0:v1","source_version_id":"clay-millennium@observed-2026-10-01","item_id":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","wording":"Is every decision problem with solutions verifiable in polynomial time also solvable in polynomial time?","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-general-status:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-clay@observed-2026-10-10","item_id":"general-status","url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","wording":"Can every decision problem with polynomially bounded, polynomial-time-checkable certificates also be decided in deterministic polynomial time?","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Page heading: Unsolved; observed 10 October 2026","supersedes":"p-vs-np:entry:0:v1"},{"id":"pnp-entry-equality:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"equality","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"Every language in NP is decidable by a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Definition 2 and problem statement, pp. 2–3","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-inequality:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"inequality","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"There exists a language in NP that is not decidable by any deterministic polynomial-time algorithm.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Problem statement and discussion, pp. 2–3","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"sat-in-p","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"Boolean satisfiability has a uniform deterministic polynomial-time decision algorithm.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Proposition 1(c) and SAT NP-completeness discussion, p. 5","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"sat-equivalence","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"P = NP if and only if SAT is in P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Definition 4, Proposition 1(c) and SAT NP-completeness discussion, pp. 4–5","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"np-circuits","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"NP is not contained in P/poly.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§5.2.1, Theorem 5.3 and Conjecture 5.4","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"circuits-imply-separation","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If NP is not contained in P/poly, then P ≠ NP.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§5.2.1, Theorem 5.3","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-np-conp:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"np-conp","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"NP and coNP are distinct.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Proof complexity discussion, pp. 5–6","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"conp-implies-separation","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If NP ≠ coNP, then P ≠ NP.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§3.5, NP versus coNP","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-karp-lipton:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"karp-lipton","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If NP is contained in P/poly, then PH = Σ₂^P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 5.5 [KL82], §5.2.1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-ladner:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"ladner","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If P ≠ NP, then some languages in NP are neither in P nor NP-complete under polynomial-time many-one reductions.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 4.1 [Lad75], §4.2","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-one-way:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"one-way","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"There exists a polynomial-time-computable function that is hard to invert on average for probabilistic polynomial-time algorithms.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Definition 4.7 and §4.5","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"owf-implies-separation","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If standard one-way functions exist, then P ≠ NP.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§4.4–4.5, Definition 4.7 and discussion","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-eth:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-eth@JCSS-2001","item_id":"eth","url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","wording":"3SAT cannot be decided in deterministic time 2^{o(n)} times a polynomial in the input length, where n is the number of variables.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§1, definition of s_k and the exponential-time hypothesis","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-eth@JCSS-2001","item_id":"eth-implies-separation","url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","wording":"If ETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§1–2, k-SAT exponential complexity and hypothesis","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"vp-vnp","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"Over a field of characteristic zero, VP and VNP are distinct.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§12.4, algebraic reductions and completeness","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-seth:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-seth@arXiv-1112.2275v3","item_id":"seth","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","wording":"For every fixed α in (0,1), there is a fixed clause width k such that k-CNF-SAT on n variables has no bounded-error randomized O(2^{αn})-time algorithm.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§1, Previous Work, p. 1; Theorem 1.1(i)","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-seth@arXiv-1112.2275v3","item_id":"seth-implies-separation","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","wording":"If the stated bounded-error randomized SETH holds, then P ≠ NP.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§1 definition; Theorem 1.1(i); immediate consequence using deterministic algorithms as a subclass","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-relativization:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-bgs@doi-10.1137/0204037-abstract-observed-2026-10-10","item_id":"relativization","url":"https://doi.org/10.1137/0204037","wording":"There are recursive oracles A and B with P^A = NP^A and P^B ≠ NP^B.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Original paper abstract, SIAM J. Comput. 4(4), 431–442, DOI 10.1137/0204037","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-rr@STOC-1994-author-paper","item_id":"natural-proofs","url":"https://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/BLOGPAPERS/natural.pdf","wording":"If a polynomial-size pseudorandom generator G_k: {0,1}^k → {0,1}^{2k} has hardness H(G_k) ≥ 2^{k^ε} for some fixed ε > 0 and all sufficiently large k, then no P-natural property useful against P/poly exists.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§2.2 (natural properties), p. 7; hardness definition and Theorem 4.1, p. 15","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-algebrization:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-aw@author-conference-version-observed-2026-10-10","item_id":"algebrization","url":"https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/alg.pdf","wording":"Resolving P versus NP requires non-algebrizing techniques in the Aaronson–Wigderson oracle-extension framework.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§2 definitions; §5 oracle constructions; introduction pp. 3–4","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-williams@CCC-2011-author-version","item_id":"nexp-acc","url":"https://people.csail.mit.edu/rrw/acc-lbs-ccc.pdf","wording":"NEXP is not contained in nonuniform polynomial-size ACC.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Abstract and main theorem, p. 1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-ctw@ECCC-TR26-039-observed-2026-10-10","item_id":"threshold-2026","url":"https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2026/039/download","wording":"For every fixed ε in (0,1), there exists a function f in E^NP not computable by depth-two THR∘THR circuits of size n^{2.5−ε}; the same holds for SYM∘THR.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 1.1, §1.1.1, p. 2","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-ren@arXiv-2607.09963v1","item_id":"near-maximum-2026","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09963v1","wording":"There exists a function in E^{prMA}/1 requiring Boolean circuits of size Ω(2^n/n).","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 1.1, p. 2","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-claude@arXiv-2610.06783v1","item_id":"three-sum-2026","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","wording":"For every fixed ν, 3SUM on n integers with absolute value at most n^ν has a deterministic O(n^{1.9992})-time algorithm in the paper’s integer-operation model.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 22 using Corollary 26; §1, numeric bounds; Acknowledgments and Methodology","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-claude@arXiv-2610.06783v1","item_id":"apsp-2026","url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","wording":"For every fixed ν, all-pairs shortest paths on directed n-vertex graphs with integer edge weights of absolute value at most n^ν and no negative cycles can be computed deterministically in O(n^{2.9995}) time.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorem 22; abstract; §1.2; Acknowledgments and Methodology","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-np-search:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"np-search","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"If P = NP, then every polynomially balanced, polynomial-time-decidable witness relation admits polynomial-time witness search or correct reporting that no witness exists.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Decision versus search discussion, p. 5","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"hierarchy-collapse","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§4.1, polynomial hierarchy; P = NP collapse discussion","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-cook@official-description-sha256-018f3d473d16","item_id":"np-complete-hard","url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","wording":"If P ≠ NP, every NP-complete decision language is outside P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Definition 4 and Proposition 1(c), pp. 4–5","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-openai@fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","item_id":"ugc-proposal","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/102.md","wording":"For every fixed ε, δ in (0,1/2), there is a deterministic polynomial-time reduction from binary 3SAT to unique games over a fixed alphabet, with completeness at least 1−ε and soundness at most δ.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Family 102; lean/docs/102.md and linked paper/comparator","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-openai@fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","item_id":"depth-three-proposal","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/112.md","wording":"A fixed language in P requires more than 2^{A√n} depth-three OR–AND–OR gates for every fixed A > 0, at every sufficiently large input length.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Family 112; lean/docs/112.md and DepthThree comparator","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-openai@fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","item_id":"permanent-proposal","url":"https://github.com/openai/math/blob/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb/lean/docs/108.md","wording":"For m ≥ 1408, every affine-linear determinant representation, including coefficientwise limits, of the complex m×m permanent has size at least m^3/(5529600e).","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Family 108; lean/docs/108.md, PermanentCubic comparator; supporting theorem scope excludes ABP consequences","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-activity-aletheia:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-aletheia@arXiv-2601.23229v2","item_id":"activity-aletheia","url":"https://arxiv.org/html/2601.23229v2","wording":"Aletheia supplies an effective strengthening of a combinatorial bound used in robust-MDP context; the authors’ preceding theorem already suffices.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Theorems 20–21, Appendix H; technical contributions §1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-entry-activity-gpt4:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-gpt4@arXiv-2309.05689v1","item_id":"activity-gpt4","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.05689v1","wording":"The authors report a GPT-4-produced proposed P ≠ NP proof schema.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"Abstract and reported 97-turn dialogue","supersedes":null}],"reports":[{"id":"p-vs-np:report:0:v1","entry_id":"p-vs-np:entry:0:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unsolved","scope":"The cited source item and version only; this is not an independent OpenMath assessment.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-01","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-general-status:v2","entry_id":"pnp-entry-general-status:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unsolved","scope":"The canonical classical uniform worst-case decision question P = NP; no supporting theorem decides this status.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/","supersedes":"p-vs-np:report:0:v1"},{"id":"pnp-report-equality:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-equality:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"The affirmative answer to the canonical question.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-inequality:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-inequality:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"The conjectural negative answer to the same canonical question.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-sat-in-p:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-sat-in-p:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"The SAT decision target; presently unresolved.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-sat-equivalence:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-sat-equivalence:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"An established equivalence between two unresolved assertions.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-np-circuits:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-np-circuits:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"A stronger circuit-complexity target than P ≠ NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-circuits-imply-separation:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-circuits-imply-separation:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A one-direction sufficient condition; the converse is not established.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-np-conp:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-np-conp:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"A stronger related separation; not equivalent to P ≠ NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-conp-implies-separation:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-conp-implies-separation:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"The implication does not establish its premise.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-karp-lipton:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-karp-lipton:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"The Karp–Lipton implication; the circuit containment premise remains unresolved.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-ladner:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-ladner:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"Existence of NP-intermediate languages; not a classification of specific natural candidates.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-one-way:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-one-way:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"Average-case cryptographic hardness; stronger than merely worst-case NP hardness.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-owf-implies-separation:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-owf-implies-separation:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"The reverse implication is not established; P ≠ NP alone is not a security guarantee.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-eth:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-eth:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"A stronger quantitative hypothesis than P ≠ NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-eth-implies-separation:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-eth-implies-separation:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A sufficient stronger hardness hypothesis; P ≠ NP does not establish ETH.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~paturi/myPapers/pubs/ImpagliazzoPaturi_2001_jcss.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-vp-vnp:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-vp-vnp:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"An algebraic analogue; no equivalence to Boolean P versus NP is asserted.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-seth:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-seth:v1","state":"reported_open","source_label":"Unresolved assertion in the cited scope","scope":"A fine-grained hardness premise stronger than the deterministic version; neither version follows from P ≠ NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-seth-implies-separation:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-seth-implies-separation:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"Only a sufficient stronger premise; P ≠ NP gives no such exponent or randomized lower bound.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2275v3","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-relativization:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-relativization:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A limitation of relativizing proofs for the unrelativized question.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://doi.org/10.1137/0204037","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-natural-proofs:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-natural-proofs:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A conditional barrier for this precise kind of circuit-lower-bound method; not for all mathematical proofs.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/BLOGPAPERS/natural.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-algebrization:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-algebrization:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A proved limitation of a specified framework, not every algebraic method.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/alg.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-nexp-acc:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-nexp-acc:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"Nondeterministic exponential time versus restricted nonuniform circuits; not an NP lower bound against unrestricted circuits.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://people.csail.mit.edu/rrw/acc-lbs-ccc.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-threshold-2026:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-threshold-2026:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"The hard function may depend on ε; its class is E^NP, not NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2026/039/download","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-near-maximum-2026:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-near-maximum-2026:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"An oracle/advice class above the target NP; no general NP separation follows.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.09963v1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-three-sum-2026:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-three-sum-2026:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A fine-grained improvement for a problem already solvable in polynomial time; no SAT speedup or P versus NP resolution is claimed.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-apsp-2026:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-apsp-2026:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"A fine-grained algorithmic improvement within polynomial time; real-weight and randomized variants have separate guarantees.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.06783v1","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-np-search:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-np-search:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"An asymptotic search consequence for these relations; output length and encoding restrictions matter.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-np-complete-hard:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-np-complete-hard:v1","state":"resolved","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","scope":"Rules out uniform polynomial-time algorithms, not efficient restricted-instance methods or heuristics.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/pvsnp.pdf","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-ugc-proposal:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-ugc-proposal:v1","state":"proposed_solution","source_label":"Provider proposes this result; assessment pending","scope":"Provider proposal for Unique Games hardness; a hardness reduction does not prove P ≠ NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://github.com/openai/math/tree/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-depth-three-proposal:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-depth-three-proposal:v1","state":"proposed_solution","source_label":"Provider proposes this result; assessment pending","scope":"Restricted depth only; not a fixed n^{1/2+ε} exponent and not unrestricted circuits.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://github.com/openai/math/tree/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","supersedes":null},{"id":"pnp-report-permanent-proposal:v1","entry_id":"pnp-entry-permanent-proposal:v1","state":"proposed_solution","source_label":"Provider proposes this result; assessment pending","scope":"A proposed bound in an algebraic model; does not separate VP from VNP or Boolean P from NP.","source_date":null,"observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://github.com/openai/math/tree/fd4aeeb2ee4fc729c18d98444fed42fd0529eeeb","supersedes":null}]},"status":{"state":"open","label":"Open","extent":"general_case","summary":"The general question remains open. Known restricted-model lower bounds, proof barriers and conditional implications explain the frontier; related faster algorithms do not settle P versus NP.","basis":"source","attributed_to":"Clay · P versus NP","as_of":"2026-10-10","progress_label":null,"progress_claim_ids":[],"remaining":"No general deterministic polynomial-time algorithm for SAT, and no proof that an NP language requires superpolynomial deterministic time, is established by this selected curation.","views":["open"],"knowledge_categories":["Proof barriers","Restricted-model lower bounds","Conditional implications","Related advances"]}},"selected_context":{"assessment_history":[{"report_id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_id":"pnp-book","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","state":"resolved","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"}],"problem_id":"problem-p-vs-np","slug":"p-vs-np","title":"P versus NP","publication_version":14,"relationship":{"claim":{"id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2},"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"},"assessments":[{"report_id":"pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_id":"pnp-book","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","source_label":"Established implication or scoped theorem in cited mathematics","state":"resolved","scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","evidence_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","entry_id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"}],"connections":[],"related_claims":[],"progress":[{"claim_id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","aspect":"Proved implications","summary":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","remaining":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","overlaps_with":[],"overlap_note":"This is one indexed assertion in its own scope. No disjoint solved fraction, strongest-known ranking or additional parent resolution is inferred.","category":"conditional_implication"}],"tasks":[],"statements":[{"statement":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","id":"claim-pnp-hierarchy-collapse","slug":"pnp-hierarchy-collapse","version":2,"kind":"theorem","title":"If P = NP, the polynomial hierarchy collapses to P","assumptions":["The classical finite-level polynomial hierarchy and deterministic polynomial time."],"scope":"An asymptotic complexity-class consequence, not a practical algorithm implementation.","source_entry_ids":["pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"formal_declarations":[],"relation":"conditional_implication","relationship_note":"This statement contributes context in its stated scope; it does not settle the canonical P versus NP question.","result":"proved","report_ids":["pnp-report-hierarchy-collapse:v1"],"independent_review":"pending"}],"entries":[{"id":"pnp-entry-hierarchy-collapse:v1","source_version_id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","item_id":"hierarchy-collapse","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","wording":"If P = NP, then PH = P.","wording_kind":"paraphrase","locator":"§4.1, polynomial hierarchy; P = NP collapse discussion","supersedes":null}],"sources":[{"work":{"authors":["Avi Wigderson"],"kind":"research_paper","publication":"published","publication_note":"Published author exposition or original paper.","ai_role":"not_reported","ai_note":"AI involvement is not reported by this cited source; this is not a claim of its absence.","artifacts":[{"kind":"pdf","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation — proof text","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","version":"author-draft-2019-08-06","assessment":"paper_proof","note":"External source text. Its mathematical claims and independent OpenMath review are assessed separately.","sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829"}],"published":{"value":"2019"}},"id":"pnp-book@author-draft-2019-08-06","source_id":"pnp-book","title":"Avi Wigderson · Mathematics and Computation","owner":"Avi Wigderson","url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","subject_scope":"The precise statements and locators cited in this P versus NP research record.","revision":"author-draft-2019-08-06","content_sha256":"c6b72d0487d31b7d7173266c8d6706649607c6615defb7e2b6c2395782ab1829","update_method":"Manual primary-source check; changes require a new source version and staff publication.","identifier_policy":"Source URL and exact theorem/section locator; no inferred identity merge.","observed_on":"2026-10-10","source_updated_on":null,"rights":"metadata-link","license":"Full-text redistribution rights not asserted","terms_url":"https://www.math.ias.edu/files/Book-online-Aug0619.pdf","attribution":"Avi Wigderson","rights_note":"Only metadata and original OpenMath paraphrases are published; proof PDFs remain at their source.","check_interval_days":30}]}}}