Talk:TFNP

isnt the sufficient context provided in the article about computational complexity theory?

The claim
 * TFNP &ne; FP would imply NP = coNP.

cannot be true, since combined with the claim
 * TFNP = FP would imply P = NP $$\cap$$ coNP

you get
 * P &ne; NP $$\cap$$ coNP implies NP = coNP

which would be a major (and very shocking) breakthrough in complexity theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.220.163 (talk) 00:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

This article should be updated to account for CLS = PPAD ∩ PLS
This article should be updated to account for CLS = PPAD ∩ PLS https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.01929 Aviad.rubinstein (talk) 17:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Basics
Could we remember some of the most basic parts of WP:MOS and WP:MOSMATH here: 2601:447:C601:3690:8015:B58:40FD:9495 (talk) 01:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Don't capitalize an initial letter merely because it is in a section heading.
 * In non-TeX math notation, italicize things that are italicized in LaTeX but not other things. I.e. variables are italicized; things liks cos, log, det, max, etc. are not, and punctuation and digits are not.
 * Use proper spacing in non-TeX math notation, i.e. a + b = 1, not a+b=1. One can refer to a number like +3 with no space between "+" and "3", but when it's a binary operation, put the space there.