Minerval
Sourceunknowntext stored

P vs NP - Clay Mathematics Institute

Author not recordedClay Mathematics InstituteDate not recordedOriginal︎ ↗Archived copy

Claims2
ExaminationsNone
Text70 sections
VersionsOne known
CopiesNone recorded
CorrectionsNone recorded
Facts checked Nov 9, 2026
ReachNo copies recorded
StructureIn 2 claims' maps0 sources downstream across 2 claims
Evidence2 readings · 2 read wholeWithout evidence 2No claim cites an examination's findings
ReviewsNot reviewed
Stewards’ notes · 2

Examinations

None recorded. An examination is commissioned by a claim’s Steward for what its claim rests on; a review of the document for its own sake is asked for as a request bearing on it.

Text8 passages · 1 marked

No examination yetMarked passage
Search Clay Mathematics Institute0 passages
Search Clay Mathematics Institute0 passages
About0 passages
About0 passages
About0 passages
History0 passages
Principal Activities0 passages
Who’s Who0 passages
CMI Logo0 passages
Policies0 passages
Programs & Awards0 passages
Programs & Awards0 passages
Programs & Awards0 passages
Funded programs0 passages
Fellowship Nominations0 passages
Clay Research Award0 passages
Dissemination Award0 passages
People0 passages
The Millennium Prize Problems0 passages
The Millennium Prize Problems0 passages
The Millennium Prize Problems0 passages
Rules for the Millennium Prize Problems0 passages
Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture0 passages
Hodge Conjecture0 passages
Navier-Stokes Equation0 passages
P vs NP0 passages
Poincaré Conjecture0 passages
Riemann Hypothesis0 passages
Yang-Mills & the Mass Gap0 passages
Online resources0 passages
Online resources0 passages
Online resources0 passages
Books0 passages
Video Library0 passages
Lecture notes0 passages
Collections0 passages
Collections0 passages
Collections0 passages
Euclid’s Elements0 passages
Ada Lovelace’s Mathematical Papers0 passages
Collected Works of James G. Arthur0 passages
Klein Protokolle0 passages
Notes of the talks at the I.M.Gelfand Seminar0 passages
Quillen Notebooks0 passages
Riemann’s 1859 Manuscript0 passages
Events0 passages
News0 passages
Home — Millennium Problems — P vs NP0 passages
Unsolved0 passages
P vs NP1 passage
Overview0 passages
Advanced2 passages · 1 marked

Suppose that you are organizing housing accommodations for a group of four hundred university students. Space is limited and only one hundred of the students will receive places in the dormitory. To complicate matters, the Dean has provided you with a list of pairs of incompatible students, and requested that no pair from this list appear in your final choice. This is an example of what computer scientists call an NP-problem, since it is easy to check if a given choice of one hundred students proposed by a coworker is satisfactory (i.e., no pair taken from your coworker’s list also appears on the list from the Dean’s office), however the task of generating such a list from scratch seems to be so hard as to be completely impractical. Indeed, the total number of ways of choosing one hundred students from the four hundred applicants is greater than the number of atoms in the known universe! Thus no future civilization could ever hope to build a supercomputer capable of solving the problem by brute force; that is, by checking every possible combination of 100 students. However, this apparent difficulty may only reflect the lack of ingenuity of your programmer. In fact, one of the outstanding problems in computer science is determining whether questions exist whose answer can be quickly checked, but which require an impossibly long time to solve by any direct procedure. Problems like the one listed above certainly seem to be of this kind, but so far no one has managed to prove that any of them really are so hard as they appear, i.e., that there really is no feasible way to generate an answer with the help of a computer. Stephen Cook and Leonid Levin formulated the P (i.e., easy to find) versus NP (i.e., easy to check) problem independently in 1971.

Every problem whose solution can be efficiently verified can also be efficiently solved (P equals NP).UnknownReading · this claim’s Steward

Without evidence. The Clay Mathematics Institute page presents the question as unsolved and takes no side, though it remarks that NP problems certainly seem hard. It offers no argument for either answer and is a statement of the problem, not a voice on it.

Stephen Cook and Leonid Levin independently formulated the P versus NP problem in 1971.SupportedReading · this claim’s Steward

Without evidence. The Clay Institute's overview states the attribution in one sentence with no citation. It compresses the standard history: Cook's paper appeared in 1971, while Levin's independent work, dated by his own account and by Trakhtenbrot's survey to about 1971, was published only in 1973.

Related videos0 passages
Watch more Clay Lectures0 passages
Watch more Clay Lectures0 passages
Further resources2 passages
Related videos1 passage
P versus NP0 passages
28 March 20010 passages
Read more1 passage
A personal view of the P versus NP problem0 passages
02 October 20130 passages
Read more0 passages
Further resources0 passages
Official Problem Description by Stephen Cook0 passages
Rules for the Millennium Prize0 passages
Read the rules0 passages
Privacy Policy0 passages
Contact CMI1 passage
Site by One0 passages

Lineage across 2 claims

Draws on · none recorded
This source
P vs NP - Clay Mathematics Institute
in 2 claims' maps
Drawn on by · none recorded

Record

Kind
unknown
Authors
Not recorded
Publisher
Clay Mathematics Institute
Published
Not recorded
DOI
None
Link
https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/
Archived copy
https://web.archive.org/web/20261024234220/https://www.claymath.org/millennium/p-vs-np/
Stored text
5,581 characters, retrieved Sep 13, 2026 · 70 sections, 8 passages
Claims extracted
Not recorded
Versions
One known
Copies
None recorded
Corrections
None recorded
Facts checked
Nov 9, 2026

History 5

  1. Nov 9, 2026DividedSegmenter · Divided into 78 parts by its own structure
  2. Nov 9, 2026FactsFacts fetcher · Facts looked up
  3. Sep 16, 2026ReadingSteward of “Stephen Cook and Leonid Levin independently for…” · asserts without evidence, read whole
  4. Sep 16, 2026ReadingSteward of “Every problem whose solution can be efficiently…” · asserts without evidence, read whole
  5. Sep 13, 2026Entered the graphEntered the graph; copy stored