Recently, I have asked a question and made sure that I provided enough details showing that I somewhat understand what I'm reading.

Overall, what details should be omitted that make the question easier to understand?

Question link

  • $\begingroup$ If you check parity of the number and provide only odd numbers as test suite, do you think it is co-np, because all answers are no? $\endgroup$
    – Evil
    Apr 28, 2019 at 4:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Evil Presumably my intentions are wrong as the Wikipedia definition is summary that leaves out important details. After, all there has to be a mathematical definition. And, wikipedia is getting it wrong(an unreliable source right now). Yes, I think it could be co-np because ALL answers are no. $\endgroup$
    – The T
    Apr 28, 2019 at 4:13
  • $\begingroup$ @Evil All answers that are no are from non-constrained Sudoku Grids. $\endgroup$
    – The T
    Apr 28, 2019 at 4:16
  • $\begingroup$ @Evil . In other words, co-NP is the class of problems for which there is a polynomial-time algorithm that can verify "no" instances. My algorithm in essence is the English Dictionary defined summary. However, the mathematical reference I don't know. $\endgroup$
    – The T
    Apr 28, 2019 at 4:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Evil I've undeleted one of my old questions, I was wondering if you could answer it. cs.stackexchange.com/questions/108480/… $\endgroup$
    – The T
    Apr 28, 2019 at 5:19
  • $\begingroup$ This is not a full answer, but I want to repeat D.W.'s advice at the end of this post to you. You are trying to solve complicated problems without fully understanding the definitions to formulate these problems properly. I would strongly advise you to first master the fundamentals, by reading a book or online course in basic complexity theory and/or algorithms. I'm afraid that you simply lack the knowledge to ask good questions about the topics you want to ask about, otherwise. $\endgroup$
    – Discrete lizard Mod
    Apr 28, 2019 at 9:55

1 Answer 1


This is somewhat improvement, but please, take a step back with your attempts. Pick a book, read questions here, take some course and learn basics. It cannot be done in one or two days, human brain needs three days to acquire concept and a week to remember it, with exercise execution when you keep revising every day. Otherwise, it will be shallow concept lost from memory in less than month.

There is a quote from Wikipedia, a summary of your attempt, your algorithm and still you try to merge complex concepts with your idea, and it does not stick.

I fully understand why, it is easier to grasp concepts through something close and familiar, but here unfortunately you really need to let it go and learn differently.

You have given a summary here in the comments, but all the time your questions are in the terms of your generator.

Imagine that I like Kakuro and you do not know this game, I am using some odd bit counting method to solve it, we talk, I ask you all the time to express anything in the terms of Kakuro. After a while you realize, that my operation is addition, but works only for even numbers, so you try to ask about odd numbers. Well, it simply fails because my Kakuro is even. So you try to somewhat tune in and it suffices for some time, but then you realize, we simply cannot continue this way, when I ask you to express Chess in terms of Kakuro addition, then ask about Draughts, then Hex and then ask more and more unrelated questions, like car driving, wood cutting or more on-topic, whether my Kakuro addition is NEXP-Hard and built this on assumption that some people add numbers really slowly.

Here huge problem arises, your generator (or mine addition example) is not complex enough to allow describing concepts in terms of it. Unfortunately it does not even allow talking about Sudoku, because it is not fully operational yet.

We are not tutoring site, to go through step by step with your journey into complexity theory, so iterative posts doesn't work well. Commonly it takes at least one semester of studies learning complexity theory, but you realize soon enough that it was not full knowledge, but description of tools to start. Try to understand us, we simply cannot believe that you have outsmarted learning curve and now keep going into advanced terms.

Any further help without your real involvement into learning will be harmful as you will get shallow or erroneous understanding, but keep building.

  • $\begingroup$ You are right, I've been stubborn trying to learn this material correctly. It is best for me to buy a textbook and take an online course when I have the time. $\endgroup$
    – The T
    Apr 28, 2019 at 13:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, it is. And when you do and encounter some problems you may ask it here, but at first try to search this site for answers, use search engine, try to solve every problem by yourself, if you get stuck, try for two more days. If it still fails and have no answer here, ask here. All the effort will pay up soon enough. $\endgroup$
    – Evil
    Apr 28, 2019 at 13:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .