This is a Aleksandr news story, published by Wired, that relates primarily to Pieter Kasteleyn news.
For more Aleksandr news, you can click here:
more Aleksandr newsFor more Pieter Kasteleyn news, you can click here:
more Pieter Kasteleyn newsFor more physics news, you can click here:
more physics newsFor more news from Wired, you can click here:
more news from WiredOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best science news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like physics news, you might also like this article about
conjectures. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest old conjectures news, intuition news, physics news, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
other conjecturesWired
•
85% Informative
A well-known hypothesis in probability theory called the bunkbed conjecture falls into this category.
The conjecture is about the different ways you can navigate the mathematical mazes called graphs when they’re stacked on top of each other like bunk beds.
A Dutch physicist named Pieter Kasteleyn wanted to mathematically prove an assertion about how liquids flow through porous solids.
Nikita Gladkov and Aleksandr Zimin ran an exhaustive, brute-force search on every graph to find a counterexample.
The mathematicians were skeptical that the bunkbed conjecture would hold for every conceivable graph.
The team then turned to machine learning to try and disprove the conjecture.
Mathematicians disprove bunkbed conjecture with total certainty.
They found that finding an upper path was 1/106,500 percent more likely than finding a lower one.
As computer- and AI -based lines of attack become more common, some mathematicians are debating whether the field’s norms will eventually have to change.
VR Score
89
Informative language
89
Neutral language
61
Article tone
informal
Language
English
Language complexity
49
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
long-living
External references
15
Source diversity
10
Affiliate links
no affiliate links