Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

P versus NP Problem Solution Manuscript 1

Seun Adedokun

Abstract This electronic document is a live template. The


various components of your paper [title, text, heads, etc.] are
already defined on the style sheet, as illustrated by the portions
given in this document.

also solving the Np complete problems based on my solution


of the P versus NP problem

I. INTRODUCTION

The common resources in the analysis are time which is


how many steps it takes to solve a problem and space which
is how much memory it talks to solve a problem therefore
I formulate a case of a deterministic and sequential analysis
as well The class P consists of all decision problems that
can be solved on a deterministic sequential machine in an
amount of time that is polynomial in the size of the input
the class NP consists of all those decision problems whose
solution can be verified in polynomial time given the right
information or whose solution ca be found in polynomial
time on a non deterministic machine NP Complete problems
are a set of problems to each of which any other NP problem
can be reduced in polynomial time and whose solution can
be verified in polynomial time which means any NP Problem
can be transformed to an NP complete problem An NP
complete problem is an NP problem that is at least as tough
as any other problem in NP An NP hard problem is at least
as hard as NP problems The Boolean Satisfiability problem
is NP complete therefore I can solve any instance of any
problem in NP by transforming it to an instance of the
Boolean satisfiability problem in polynomial time I compute
and analyze if any NP complete problem is in P which means
I am solving the P versus NP problem I can describe the
NP complete problem as given a description of a turing
machine guaranteed to halt in polynomial time does there
exist a polynomial size input that the turing machine accepts

This is manuscript 1 of the 30 manuscript of the P versus


NP problem solution I solve the P versus Np Problem based
on my analysis of the Boolean satisfiability criterion
II. A BSTRACT
A. Selecting a Template (Heading 2)
The P versus NP is a question that asks whether every
problem whose solution can be quickly verified by a computer can also be quickly solved by the computer The term
quickly used here is about if there is an algorithm solving
the task that runs in polynomial time and I have formulated
the algorithm By the polynomial time it means the time to
complete the task varies as a polynomial function on the
size of the input to the algorithm The class of problems for
which an algorithm can provide an answer in polynomial
time is called class P while the class of questions for which
an answer can be verified in polynomial time is called NP
which stands for nondeterministic polynomial time
B. System Model
I solve the millennium prize problem called the P versus
NP which asks whether every problem whose solution can
be quickly verified by a computer can also be solved by a
computer and I explain clearly its practical implications I also
solve the other 6 millennium prize problems which are the
hodge conjecture the Riemann hypothesis Yang mills existence and mass gap Navier stokes existence and smoothness
Birch and swinnerton dyer conjecture the Poincare conjecture
Boolean Satisfiability is about determining if there exists an
interpretation that satisfies a given Boolean formula whether
the variables of a given Boolean formula can be replaced by
true or false such that the formula evaluates to true which is
the test of satisfiability I solve the Boolean satisfiability and
I explain its consequent relationship to the 3 sat analysis
from which I provide a detailed solution of the P versus
NP problem I formulate an algorithm that efficiently solves
the boolean satisfiability problem and therefore resolving the
boolean satisfiability problem implies that I am solving the
P versus NP problem I hereby formulate an algorithm called
Seun Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm and I will explain
this algorithm and its practical application in the solution
that I formulate This is manuscript 1 of the Manuscripts I
am writing on my solution of the P versus Np problems I am

III. S OLUTION M ETHODOLOGY

A. Logical Analysis
From the notion of effective calculability For a method
to be effective calculable some important criteria must be
analyzed which I have analyzed and included in the logic
analysis The method should have a finite number of exact
finite instructions For a case where I want to apply the
logical method for the analysis the algorithm I am using for
the logic analysis will finish after a finite number of steps
The algorithm method should produce a correct answer I
can evaluate the outcome of the algorithm I am using even
without any aids this condition is quite important as I can
use it as check on the algorithm iteration The algorithm may
be very intricate but it can be understandable in simple terms
I analyze the case where the algorithm does not return an
answer where the domain of expected algorithm output is
outside the domain of analysis this is quite important as a
case where n which is for example the number of iteration
is quite large

B. Boolean Satisfiability
Boolean Satisfiability I analyze the concept of Boolean
satisfiability problem which I am using to solve the P versus
NP Problem the boolean satisfiability problem is the problem
of determining if there exists an interpretation that satisfies
a given boolean formula therefore it asks if the variables of
a given boolean formula can be consistently replaced by the
values true or false such that the formula evaluates to true If
the formula evaluates to true then it is satisfiable but if false
it is unsatisfiable for example the logical and statement a and
not b where for values of a=true and b-false the logical and
statement a and not b evaluates to true but the logical and
statement a and not a where for values of a=true and b-false
the logical and statement a and not a evaluates to false
C. Automated Theorem Proving
Automated theorem proving is the field of automated reasoning and mathematical logic where I can prove mathematical theorems by computer programs For propositional logic
the concept of deciding the validity of a formula depends on
the logical analysis involved the logical analysis I have used
for the solution methodology of the Hasse weil conjecture
and the Birch and swinnerton conjecture is computationally
feasible in polynomial time because I can easily explain the
birch and swinnerton conjecture logically as a 3 Sat problem
and I have formulated an algorithm to prove its Boolean Satisfiability called the Seun Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm
I have confirmed that the Seun Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm satisfies the Godels completeness theorem The Godels
completeness theorem is a fundamental in mathematical logic
that establishes a correspondence between semantic truth and
syntactic provability in first order logic I have formulated
the Seun Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm and the algorithm
satisfies the Godels completeness theorem it should be noted
that a first order formula is logically valid if it is true in every
structure for the language of the formula where the language
of the formula in this case means for any assignment of
values to the variables of the formula The Seun Adedokun
Polynomial algorithm that I propose is logically valid I will
provide more details on this in manuccript 2 For the Seun
Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm I have also being able to
define a deductive system for the completeness theorem and I
have confimed that the deductive system is complete because
I have confirmed that the logically valid formula I am
using is the conlusion of a formal logical deductive system
and the completeness theorem for a particular deductive
system is the theorem that it is complete in this sense Even
though I can say the Seun Adedokun Polynomial Algorithm
satisfies the Godels Completeness theorem I hereby say with
certainty that I disagree with Godels incompleteness theorem
which states that no consistent system of axioms whose
theorems can be listed by an effective procedure is capable
of proving all truths about the arithmetic of the natural
numbers I will provide more details on this in manuscript
2 I will also provide more detailed solution analysis on
the Halting problem I stand to correct the notion by Alan
turing that a general algorithm to solve the halting program

for all possible program input pairs cannot exist I have


formulated a revolutionary mathematical and logical solution
to these questions and these solutions I have confirmed to
be consistent with automated theorem proving and I have
confirmed that the solutions I formulate is also consistent
with automated reasoning
I formulate an algorithm that satisfies the specified conditions above I am using an algorithm that has a finite number
of exact finite instructions I am using an algorithm method
that produces a correct answer and am using an algorithm
that will finish after a finite number of logical steps I make
sure divergence doesnt happen in the algorithm iteration as
if for sufficient values of n which implies the number of
iterations is very large it is mathematically understandable
that the output of the algorithm for the reasonable large value
of n is a representation of the possible outputs for n greater
than such large value but that is a necessary condition for a
check I also use a sufficient condition to guarantee that even
for values of n greater than such large value the domain
of analysis for n greater than such large value is accurately
analyzed which is a major step ahead of previous proving
methods in mathematics and computational complexity
D. Dpll Algorithm
Dpll algorithm is a backtracking based search algorithm
for deciding the satisfiability of propositional logic formulae
in conjunctive normal form The basic backtracking algorithm
runs by choosing a literal assigning a truth value to it
simplifying the formula and then recursively checking if
the simplified formula is satisfiable if this is the case the
original formula is satisfiable otherwise the same recursive
check is done assuming the opposite truth value since the
Sat problem is an Np complete problem only algorithms
with an exponential worst case complexity is known for
it I therefore formulate the Seun Adedokun Polynomial
Algorithm which runs in a polynomial time and I satisfy
the boolean satisfiabilty condition for the solution of the
P versus NP problem I will be explaining more on my
solution analysis of the P versus NP Problem based on the
Seun Adedokun polynomial algorithm in manuscript 2 and
manuscript 3 and I will explain the comparative advantage
of the seun adedokun polynomial algorithm compared to the
Dpll algorithm also
DPLL Algorithm
Algorithm DPLL
Input: A set of clauses .
Output: A Truth Value.
function DPLL()
if is a consistent set of literals
then return true;
if contains an empty clause
then return false;
for every unit clause l in
unit-propagate(l, );
for every literal l that occurs pure in
pure-literal-assign(l, );
l choose-literal();

return DPLL( l) or DPLL( not(l));


Integer factorization I will explain more on my solution
approach to the integer factorization problem and I am
explaining more about my solution approach as regards the
practical applications
E. 3sat
Like the satisfiability problem for arbitrary formulas determining the satisfiability of a formula in conjuctive normal
form where each clause is limited to at most Three literals
is NP complete also this problem is called 3 Sat reducing
the unrestricted sat problem to 3 sat is like transforming the
clause
l1 l2 l3 ln
to 3 sat a conjunction of n-2 clauses
(l1 l2 x2 )(x2 l3 x3 )(x3 l4 x4 )(x( n 3)l( n 2)x( n 2))
(x( n 2)l( n 1)ln
Where x2 ..x( n 2) are fresh variables not occurring
elsewhere Even though the two logical expressions
l1 l2 l3 ..ln

l1 l2 x2 )(x2 l3 x3 )(x3 l4 x4 )(x( n 3)l( n 2)x( n 2))


(x( n 2)l( n 1)ln
Are not logically equivalent they are equisatisfiable I stand
to disprove in this solution the exponential time hypothesis
that assert that no algorithm can solve 3-SAT in time that is
fundamentally faster than exp(o(n) as the polynomial algorithm that I formulate called the Seun Adedokun Polynomial
algorithm runs in polynomial time I therefore solve the
P versus NP problem as I formulate the Seun Adedokun
Polynomial Algorithm
F. Binary Decision Diagram
A binary decision diagram is a data structure that is used to
represent a boolean function binary decision diagrams can be
considered as a compressed representation of sets or relations
A boolean function can be represented as a rooted directed
acyclic graph which consists of several decision nodes and
terminal nodes there are the 0 termianl nodes and the 1
terminal nodes Each decision node N is labeled by a boolean
variable VN and has two child nodes called the low child and
high child The edge from node VN to a low or a high child
corresponds to an assignment of VN to 0 or 1 For the figure
below value of 1 represents the solid lines to a low child
while a value of 0 represents the dotted lines to a high child
A binary decision tree and its truth table is shown below

G. Computational Complexity
The time complexity of an algorithm quantifies the amount
of time taken by an algorithm to run as a function of the
length of the string representing the input which is expressed
as the big O notation the time complexity is said to be
described asymptotically as the input size goes to infinity
for example if the time required by an algorithm on inputs
of size n is at most 5n3 + 4n the asymptotic time complexity
is O(n3 )
The worst case time complexity can be used to measure an
algorithms performance time which may vary with different
inputs of the same size denoted by T (n) an algorithm with
O(n) is called a linear time algorithm and an algorithm with
T (n) = O(M n )andM n = O(T (n)) for Mn1 is said to be
an exponential time algorithm For a constant time complexity
analysis the running time T (n) is O(1) for a logarithmic
time complexity analysis the running time is O(logn) For a
linear time complexity analysis the running time is O(n) For
an exponential time complexity analysis the running time is
2( poly(n)) 2n 2( n2 ) For an exponential time with linear exponent the running time is 2( O(n))11n 10n For a polynomial
time the running time is 2( O(log(n))) = poly(n)nnlognn1 0
Polynomial algorithm problems are algorithm problems for
which a deterministic polynomial time algorithm exists and
belong to the complexity class P Exponential time algorithm

problems are problems which admits exponential time algorithms on a deterministic turing machine and they are
described by the complexity class EXP and described by
the function T (n) = 2( nc ) For a case where the exponent is
a linear function of n T (n) = 2( o(n)) this case is described
by the complexity class E
H. Consequences of the P versus NP
I will explain the practical consequences of the P versus
NP problem that I formulate in cryptography like the Public Key cryptography symmetric ciphers and cryptographic
hashing I will also explain the practical consequences in Operations research like some types of integer programming and
travelling salesman problem and some interesting application
like protein structure folding and practical consequences in
medicine
I am also solving the Karps 21 NP complete problems
like Satisfiability the 0 -1 integer programming the Clique
the Set Packing Vertex cover Set covering Feedback node
set Feedback arc set Directed Hamilton circuit Undirected
Hamilton circuit I am also solving the Satisfiability with at
most 3 literals per clause the chromatic number Clique cover
Exact cover Hitting set Steiner tree 3 dimensional matching
Knapsack Job sequency Partition and max cut problem
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper os manuscript 1 of my 30 manuscripts to the
solution that i formulate on P versus NP problem I solve the
P versus NP based on my analysis and solution of of the
boolean satisfiability criterion.
APPENDIX
Appendixes should appear before the acknowledgment.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The preferred spelling of the word acknowledgment in
America is without an e after the g. Avoid the stilted
expression, One of us (R. B. G.) thanks . . . Instead, try R. B.
G. thanks. Put sponsor acknowledgments in the unnumbered
footnote on the first page.
References are important to the reader; therefore, each
citation must be complete and correct. If at all possible,
references should be commonly available publications.
R EFERENCES
[1] The question on the Boolean Satisfiability criterion .

S-ar putea să vă placă și