English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this paper we critique Keum-Bae Cho's proof that $\mathrm{P} \subsetneq\mathrm{NP}$. This proof relates instances of 3-SAT to indistinguishablebinomial decision trees and claims that no polynomial-time algorithm can solve3-SAT instances represented by these trees. We argue that their proof fails tojustify a crucial step, and so the proof does not establish that $\mathrm{P}\subsetneq \mathrm{NP}$.

A Critique of Keum-Bae Cho's Proof that $\mathrm{P} \subsetneq \mathrm{NP}$