A young computer scientist and two colleagues show that searches within data structures called hash tables can be much faster than previously deemed possible.
Did you read the article? The claim is that they have invented a new kind of hash table that has vastly improved algorithmic complexity compared to standard hash tables.
I haven’t read the paper yet, but if what the article claims is true, it could be revolutionary in computer science and open up a ton of doors.
I haven’t had time to fully read it yet, but glancing through, it looks pretty legit.
This is a graduate computer science student working with accomplished CS faculty at Rutgers and Carnegie Mellon, we aren’t talking about some rando making outlandish claims.
The thing about theoretical computer science is that, like math, it isn’t subject to the pitfalls of empirical science. It isn’t dependent on reproduction. The proof is provided in the paper, so either it indeed proves what it claims to, or the proof is erroneous, which can readily be refuted.
Oh yes, the new revolutionary data structure called a hash table
Did you read the article? The claim is that they have invented a new kind of hash table that has vastly improved algorithmic complexity compared to standard hash tables.
I haven’t read the paper yet, but if what the article claims is true, it could be revolutionary in computer science and open up a ton of doors.
I’m very skeptical
You can read the full paper yourself here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.02305.
I haven’t had time to fully read it yet, but glancing through, it looks pretty legit.
This is a graduate computer science student working with accomplished CS faculty at Rutgers and Carnegie Mellon, we aren’t talking about some rando making outlandish claims.
The thing about theoretical computer science is that, like math, it isn’t subject to the pitfalls of empirical science. It isn’t dependent on reproduction. The proof is provided in the paper, so either it indeed proves what it claims to, or the proof is erroneous, which can readily be refuted.