Are you unable to complete your daily punch card if you complete all the nps quests? It would be really dumb if you cant complete that if you do. I want to complete all the quest but I'm scared that I wont be able to do daily's.
They’ve been working on it for a year.
They told me they were done in 2 months as they were leaving my office after asking if they can give amlodipine with a HR of 55.
Pls
Basically just the title I guess, I am not sure further clarification is needed but just incase say we solve the travelling salesman problem in polynomial time, would that then prove/show that P=NP, or that TSP problem is not NP and that it is P? or is there some middle ground and that it proves both somehow?
Here’s a timeline, with references, outlining how Dr. Pourhassan allegedly filed the BLA incomplete, PRed that it was filed complete, and how he and Dr. Kelly subsequently sold millions of shares before publicly announcing that the BLA was in fact, incomplete. The SEC might refer to this as material misstatement or omission in a company’s public statements and insider trading.
-On April 14th, 2020, the stock closed at $2.51 with a high of $2.77.
On April 14th, 2020, per documents from a court filing, Dr. Pourhassan sent an email to Amarex, Cytodyn’s Contract Research Organization (CRO), requesting the biologics license application (BLA) for HIV be filed whether the BLA was complete or not. “Please file the BLA no later than next week Wednesday, even if we are short in no matter what portion of whatever it is that we are short.” This request was made because, per Dr. Pourhassan, “Today we have so far in 1 hour almost 20% drop in our stock price. Yesterday we had drop also after putting out great results about COVID-19 patients we are seeing these type of decline. This drop will be much deeper if we don’t file our BLA as the message board now is getting bombarded by investors who are very frustrated with me and CytoDyn.”
-On April 27th, 2020, the day the BLA PR was released, the stock closed at $3.73 with a high of $3.74. The previous trading days close was $3.18.
On April 27th, 2020, CYDY released a PR announcing the submission of the biologics license application (BLA) for their drug leronlimab (LL) for combination therapy in HIV patients. The title of the PR specifically stated, “CytoDyn Submits Completed Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA…” Later in the PR, Dr. Pourhassan is quoted as saying, “With the BLA filing for a combination therapy now complete, we are continuing our efforts on commercialization-readiness, as well as advancing leronlimab in the other important therapeutic areas of COVID-19, cancer and immunology.”
https://www.cytodyn.com/investors/news-events/press-releases/detail/421/cytodyn-submits-completed-biologics-license-application
-On April 30th, 2020, three trading days after the BLA PR was released, the stock closed at $3.50 with a high of $3.74.
On April 30th, 2020, per SEC filings discussed below, Dr. Pourhassan sold 2,219,387 shares at $3.53.
-On May 1st, 2020, four tradings days after the BLA PR was released, the stock closed at $3.19 with a high of $3.54
On May 1st per SEC filings discussed below, Dr. Pourhassa
... keep reading on reddit ➡For a homework assignment I need to implement various strategies and conduct experiments to solve a self-chosen NP-complete graph problem and summarize the different performances in a report, using an exact algorithm (polynomial time in some parameter k), a heuristic and a constant-factor approximation. Do you have any interesting suggestions?
Currently I'm looking at tree-decomposition, tree-depth and disjoint paths.
Now to figure out what my next main goal will be.
I've been stuck reasoning about this problem recently. Let's take the traveling salesman decision problem as an example:
Is there a path through a graph G which visits every node once and whose edges amount to a cost less than C
If I want to produce an "yes" answer to this problem with a nondeterministic machine, my algorithm is simple: nondeterministically grab nodes from G and the sum the weight of the edges between them, and if the total cost is less than C, yield "yes" and accept, otherwise loop or whatever. This is clearly polynomial (linear) in the number of nodes in G.
However, I can't figure out a way to produce a "no" answer to this decision problem in polynomial time. The problem of proving that there isn't a path with a cost less than C seems to run into the same problem that the generalized traveling salesman problem has: any algorithm needs to do work on every possible path to prove the result. I don't think that you would be able to do this in polynomial time, even nondeterministically.
Am I thinking about this wrong? Or is my concept of NP-complete wrong, and that we don't have deciders which run in polynomial time nondeterministically for NP-complete problems, just recognizers.
Hey everyone.
As i was studying for my exams next month for computational complexity i faced this rather odd problem:
Show that the following problem is NP-complete: n are a rectangle of dimensions a1 × b1, a2 × b2,. . . , an × bn (ai and bi positive integers) and two integers A and B and it is asked to decide whether the n rectangles can be placed in a rectangle of dimensions A × B without overlapping. The rectangles are allowed to rotate.
How would you prove it properly?
It’s just aggravating because I could be like 30000 above and still end up losing. This game just feels like it’s constantly cheating me on something between this and stamina among many other things.
I don't even know if it will work for all inputs. I tested dozens of inputs with 100s of lists given for input.
Horrible Polynomial Complexity (Well, it's not easy solving Exact-List-Cover instances it's NP-complete!)
Read it clear....
n = len(s)
while_loop_steps = n*241*((n*241)-1)*((n*241)-2)//6
Now, you got an idea why it takes 5-10 minutes to output the solution for a nearly 200 3-units given for C. Although, it has to do more with the input C rather than the variable mentioned above.
Imagine how long it would take to output a solution given for 3000 3-units for C. Hours if you're lucky... Assuming if it actually works better than the naive method.
Yes, I did get the solution in polynomial time. Albeit impractically!
In summary, the narrative before Confessions of a Dangerous Mind is as follows. Thomas listens to Under Pressure on his way to pick up Kai from Babble, so they can begin their journey towards Paradise. Then Thalia gets a voice upgrade and The Incredible True Story ends with Thomas and Kai landing on Paradise. Thomas and Kai have been walking on planet Paradise towards Paradise City, being guided by Thalia. They just listened to Everybody and are about to listen to YSIV. Then they arrive in Paradise and it is peaceful for a short time, which is depicted in the Bobby Tarantino cover art. We then know that the depiction of events on the cover of Bobby Tarantino II happen, Logic’s hand gets injured and they are driving away from Paradise. This leads me to believe that when Thomas, Kai and Thalia get to Paradise City after they finish walking there, and before the depiction of events on the Everybody album cover Thalia does something to betray Thomas and Kai, and metaphorically Logic. Logic’s hand being injured by Thalia’s traitorous action represents his inability to write anymore and is directly correlated to the recent developments that have come from the release of Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. The fact that Logic is driving away from Paradise also fits this narrative, because after being imitated by Thalia, Logic is metaphorically leaving Paradise with the inability to write because Thalia is actually making music as him.
This is where things get interesting and where Confessions of a Dangerous Mind comes in to play. We know that Thalia betrays Thomas and Kai or humanity in some way, and we also know that Thomas and Kai have been listening to each of Logics Studio albums. Because of this, it is safe to assume that Thomas and Kai have also listened to Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. This means that Thomas and Kai could have listened to Confessions of a Dangerous Mind after they first arrived at Paradise City and before the cover of Everybody. If it were actually Thalia imitating Logic that made Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, that could be the traitorous act that she commits. It could be an extended metaphor for the dangers of social media and how terrible the future could be if we lost our humanity and let technology control our lives.
He used Thalia taking control of him and making Confessions of a Dangerous Mind as a way to make the type of music that he wanted to make while staying within his narrative. Everything
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hello, i recently read an article (very confusing unfortunately) on NP hardness and NP completeness. I didn't gain much from it so i decided to ask the question here. What is NP hardness and how does it compare to NP completeness?
For example, is it possible to show that a Sudoku matrix in an unsolved state contains more information entropy than in a solved state?
Apparently, this post is off-topic on r/logic .
I saw some Automaski Solutions videos on YouTube when I was looking for information about Sat solvers.
In this video, they claim to have a O(n^4) algorithm for solving NP-complete problems: https://youtu.be/GBChl_Aa5hA
In this video, they blurt out some more numbers: https://youtu.be/eKY23Gx345M
The first video has a bunch of graphs about how fast their sat solver is. The second video mostly poops on non-existent technologies like quantum computing and cold fusion. In the second video, they're very clear that they won't show anyone their source code or license their technology. However, they say they've had their algorithms since the 1990s. The patents on them would have expired by now... if they ever existed.
They say that some of their NP-complete solutions are rarely as slow as O(n^7) in the second video. They don't ever say what their algorithms are or how they work.
They determine the runtime of their algorithms empirically. So they don't prove the runtime. They just draw graphs and say their algorithms are faster.
They want millions of dollars, but their algorithms are available now. They say that they've solved 11 or dozens of NP-complete problems in polynomial time. And they also say that researchers have ignored their solutions.
They just put up some graphs and show the computer printing out numbers. And they ask for millions of dollars. Is this a thing that people do? They even showed pictures from the Matrix movie that they probably don't have permission to use? DO PEOPLE GIVE THEM MONEY FOR THIS??????
In the first video, it says what they plan to do with the millions of dollars:
- Data Structures 10x-100x Improvement
- Java -> C++ 10x-100x Improvement
- ASIC/FPGA's 1000x Improvement
- Multi-Threaded 100x Improvement (Vertical Scaling)
- Distributed 1000x+ Improvement (Horizontal Scaling)
Why don't they just use better data structures already? How is porting from Java to C++ going to be 100 times faster? Even 10 times faster is kind of a stretch. I don't know what ASIC/FPGA is. If they're using Java, what is so hard about using multiple threads? That video was from 2019. No one ever taught me how to use multi-threading because I graduated from college in 2002, but I figured it out from books. I felt I had to learn about it just to meet a bare minimum level of quality. The distributed part could actually be a major proj
... keep reading on reddit ➡I have read that prime decomposition is in NP but not NP-Complete because it can be checked in polynomial time if we have prime numbers.
While NP-Complete problems are NP-hard-problems in NP, how do we tell if a Problem in NP is actually NP Complete? Yes, NP-Complete problems are NP-hard problems in NP, but how do I actually tell if an NP Problem is NP-Complete? I've read that NP-Complete problems are the hardest in NP but is there any way to tell a problem is NP-Complete?
I really enjoy this concept and am doing self-learning on it but I have yet to find resources or approaches for making NP-complete reduction proofs or how to think about them? Does anyone have any thoughts on how they approach it or any resources that do a really good job at making these proofs and reductions “click”?
I really cannot understand the wikipedia.
title! title.
This will be challenging, because I don't expect most historians to fully know the field of Mathematics. Hopefully, someone who has a keen interest in both will be up to the challenge to share.
>The world is changed and he gets his monetary prizes and gets his place in the history books.
>
>Let's explore the world of mathematics & science after this important discovery.
>
>Which direction will the history of Computer Science go after this?
Timestampu & Additional Pictures
Happy New Year everyone! I'm doing a little cleanup for the new year so it's time to sell some stuff! That said here's the details:
I'm feeling nice with the new year so prices include shipping. AKA Free Shipping
| Keyboards | Details | Price | Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rama M60 Sage | $450 (No switch), $480 (With switches) | SOLD | |
| E-White 60% GK64 | $180 (No switch), $200 (With switches) | SOLD |
| Keycaps | Details | Price | Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| EnjoyPBT BOW R2 | $110 (shipped in baggie) | SOLD | |
| NP Icecream Kit | $70 (shipped in baggie) | SOLD |
| Switch | Details | Price | Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linjar Linear Switch (x70) | $40 | SOLD |
A small hospital system I round at dropped the requirement for NPs to have co-signature progress notes a while back. It rankled me and it makes the PA's look inferior. Some docs love it because it's one less thing they have to do. The smart docs know that they are still fully liable for their collaborators and the smart NP's still document that the treatment plan is d/w the Dr. It's just one more thing that makes the NP look a little more attractive, even though they might have just taken your orders last week.
I brought it up with the head of med recs and they said per their "bylaws" it is not required. I told them who cares about your bylaws if it is state law to have a portion signed?
This is what a snippet of the state collaboration agreement reads:
- The collaborating physician shall develop and carry out a program to ensure the quality of care provided by an advanced practitioner of nursing. The program must include, without limitation:
(a) An assessment of the medical competency of the advanced practitioner of nursing;
(b) A review and initialing of selected charts
The big hospital systems still have one hundred percent co-sign, but we can't do peer review PA to NP as of 2 or 3 years ago. In my opinion there should be a PA and NP position in large hospital system to make sure this kind of discrimination can't fly.
I am still waiting to hear back from their company lawyers. Supervisory language cannot be stricken fast enough from state laws!
