Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

admin
Pinned June 14, 2016

<> Embed

@  Email

Report

Uploaded by user
Largest-ever math proof chews up 200TB of data
<> Embed @  Email Report

Largest-ever math proof chews up 200TB of data

Jon Fingas , @jonfingas May 29, 2016 
 

University of Texas

You’ve probably been asked to prove a math solution at some point, but never like this. Researchers have created the world’s largest math proof while solving the Boolean Pythagorean triples problem, consuming a whopping 200TB of data — the previous record was ‘just’ 13GB. The sheer size came from having to consider the sheer range (nearly 1 trillion) of possibilities involved in coloring integers. You could technically use a 68GB compressed version at home, but it’d take about 30,000 hours of processing time to crunch the data.

It’s impressive stuff, although Nature is quick to note that this isn’t quite a Holy Grail. A giant proof might solve the problem, but it doesn’t provide a consistent explanation for why the results come out the way they do, something that you can apply to other cases. In one sense, it’s like cheating on an exam. While you may know the answers, you aren’t really learning how to solve things on your own.

(17)

Pinned onto