2014/04/22 by Dan Hassin, Hassin, Dan, Adam Scrivener +3
Arts and Humanities · Mathematics · Psychology · #Computational Complexity (cs.CC) #FOS: Computer and information sciences #History and Theory of Mathematics #Philosophy and Theoretical Science #Philosophy, Science, and History
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1404.5352
openalex publication_date 2014/04/22 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
This paper is a critique of version three of Joonmo Kim's paper entitled "P is not equal to NP by Modus Tollens. [arXiv:1403.4143v3]" After summarizing Kim's proof, we note that the logic that Kim uses is inconsistent, which provides evidence that the proof is invalid. To show this, we will consider two reasonable interpretations of Kim's definitions, and show that "P is not equal to NP" does not seem to follow in an obvious way using any of them.