<p>No, the pruning in the paper doesn’t work. For example, consider a graph on four nodes where two nodes have distance 1 while the other two have distance 101, with all other edges having distance 100. The most efficient route takes the longest edge, while avoiding it takes an extra distance of 98.</p>
<p>In general  be very suspicious of any claimed proof or disproof of P = NP.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-26T13:34:00.983Z
“In general be very suspicious of any claimed proof or disproof of P = NP.”  Any proof accepted by the community — even anything that looks like it has a serious chance of being correct — will receive truly massive publicity.  If a claimed proof has languished for four years without much attention, that means that researchers in the field don’t think it’s worth taking seriously.
PLL
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-29T02:59:16.770Z
@PLL I understand. Thank you.
Wei-Cheng Liu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-26T03:09:38.433Z
2022-12-26T03:09:38.433Z
Charles
<p>Recently, I saw a paper on the Internet [1]. Did the author of this paper, Jinliang Wang, solve the P versus NP problem?</p>
<p><strong>Reference</strong></p>
<p>[1] Wang, J. L. (2018) Fast Algorithm for the Travelling Salesman Problem and the Proof of P = NP. <em>Applied Mathematics</em>, 9, 1351-1359. doi: 10.4236/am.2018.912088.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-26T02:38:01.280Z
The URL of this paper is "https://doi.org/10.4236/am.2018.912088".
Wei-Cheng Liu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-26T15:11:12.863Z
The list of papers* from this prolific researcher shows that he also proved the Riemann hypothesis in 2019 and in 2021. Alas, the two papers were retracted...

* https://www.scirp.org/journal/articles.aspx?searchcode=Jinliang++Wang&searchfield=authors&page=1
Pamphile
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-29T02:50:52.377Z
@Pamphile I understand. Thank you.
Wei-Cheng Liu
<p-vs-np>
Did Jinliang Wang solve the P versus NP problem?
Wei-Cheng Liu
# Did Jinliang Wang solve the P versus NP problem?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-12-26)

Recently, I saw a paper on the Internet [1]. Did the author of this paper, Jinliang Wang, solve the P versus NP problem?

**Reference**

[1] Wang, J. L. (2018) Fast Algorithm for the Travelling Salesman Problem and the Proof of P = NP. *Applied Mathematics*, 9, 1351-1359. doi: 10.4236/am.2018.912088.

**Tags:** p-vs-np
> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: The URL of this paper is "https://doi.org/10.4236/am.2018.912088".  
> **username_1**: The list of papers* from this prolific researcher shows that he also proved the Riemann hypothesis in 2019 and in 2021. Alas, the two papers were retracted...  * https://www.scirp.org/journal/articles.aspx?searchcode=Jinliang++Wang&searchfield=authors&page=1  
> **username_0**: @Pamphile I understand. Thank you.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-12-26. Score: 13 | Accepted answer

No, the pruning in the paper doesn’t work. For example, consider a graph on four nodes where two nodes have distance 1 while the other two have distance 101, with all other edges having distance 100. The most efficient route takes the longest edge, while avoiding it takes an extra distance of 98.

In general be very suspicious of any claimed proof or disproof of P = NP.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: “In general be very suspicious of any claimed proof or disproof of P = NP.”  Any proof accepted by the community — even anything that looks like it has a serious chance of being correct — will receive truly massive publicity.  If a claimed proof has languished for four years without much attention, that means that researchers in the field don’t think it’s worth taking seriously.  
> **username_0**: @PLL I understand. Thank you.  

---

