<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Survey propagation: an algorithm for satisfiability · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cs_0212002/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cs_0212002/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Survey propagation: an algorithm for satisfiability — mentioned by abetusk</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46833227</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:cs_0212002:46833227</guid><pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:48:08 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I think you have it wrong. Wolfram&amp;#x27;s claim is that for a wide array of small (s,k) (including s &amp;lt;= 4, k &amp;lt;= 3), there&amp;#x27;s complex behavior and a profusion of (provably?) Turing machine equivalent (TME) machines. At the end of the article, Wolfram talks about awarding a prize in 2007 for a proof that (s=2,k=3) was TME. The `s` stands for states and `k` for colors, without talking at all about tape length. One way to say &amp;quot;principle of computational equivalence&amp;quot; is that &amp;quot;if it looks complex, it probably is&amp;quot;. That is, TME is the norm, rather than the exception. If true, this probably means that you…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/cs_0212002/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CC</category></item></channel></rss>
