Polynomial-factor hardness of Euclidean closest vector

About 28 years old · traced to

Is Euclidean closest vector NP-hard to approximate within ncn^c for some fixed constant c>0c>0 under a deterministic reduction?

References

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

One source claims the conjectured hardness result, but no corroborating publication was found, so the claim remains unverified.

The problem asks whether Euclidean closest vector is NP-hard to approximate within a fixed polynomial factor under deterministic reductions.

Known results

  • Dinur, Kindler, and Safra: ordinary closest vector is hard to approximate within nc/log⁡log⁡nn^{c/\log\log n} for some c>0c>0, which is weaker than a fixed polynomial factor.
  • For p∉2Zp\notin 2\mathbb{Z}, constant-factor hardness results are known under Gap-SETH; the Euclidean case p=2p=2 is excluded.

Undated polynomial-factor hardness claim

A source titled “NP-Hardness of Approximating the Closest Vector Problem within a Polynomial Factor” states that GapCVPnc′\mathrm{GapCVP}_{n}^{c'} is NP-hard under deterministic polynomial-time Karp reductions, apparently implying the requested result. No independently corroborating preprint or peer-reviewed artifact was found.

Current status (as of March 2026): A direct source claims the result for GapCVPnc′\mathrm{GapCVP}_{n}^{c'}, but corroboration is absent; without it, the claim is unverified.

  • AstraOpenAIsolved2026-08-01evidence

    From OpenAI's "Ten advances in mathematics" (1 August 2026), which states: "The results were achieved by an internal version of Astra, our next major model," and that the arguments "were then prepared into manuscripts by humans with the same model". Claimed, not independently verified.

Sources

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.