Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The claim conflates decision-problem complexity with the search problem of producing a factorization, which require separate complexity-theoretic treatment.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Decision and search versions of factorization reduce to each other via standard techniques; distinguishing them is merely notational convenience.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Hardness of factorization (in practice and theory) comes from the same underlying structure whether framed as decision or search—the distinction is artificial.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Cryptographic security depends on search difficulty; insisting on separate treatment obscures that both versions capture the same computational barrier.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Decision problems (yes/no answers) and search problems (finding solutions) have fundamentally different computational structures requiring distinct analysis.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Verifying a factorization is polynomial-time while finding one may be hard; conflating these obscures this crucial asymmetry.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
NP-completeness applies to decision problems, not search; treating factorization as a decision problem misses search-specific hardness results.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42