The matrix multiplication exponent equals two
An arithmetic program over with inputs is a finite sequence of registers . Each register is either a constant , an input , or for earlier registers and an operation . Its cost is the number of registers of the third kind, that is, the number of arithmetic operations. A program multiplies matrices if its inputs are the entries of and, for each , some register equals for all .
Let be the least cost of such a program. The matrix multiplication exponent is
The entries of are distinct polynomials of degree , so each occupies its own operation register. Hence and . The schoolbook algorithm gives .
Conjecture. . Equivalently, for every there is a constant such that for every some arithmetic program multiplies complex matrices with cost at most
A solution must prove this equality. Allowing division gates does not change [2]. The value of depends only on the characteristic of the field, so the same question over or is equivalent [10]. also equals the exponent of the border rank of the matrix multiplication tensor [3, 10].
Background
Strassen's 1969 algorithm multiplies matrices with multiplications and, applied recursively, gives [1]. The question of the true exponent has driven algebraic complexity theory since then [18]. Many problems in linear algebra share the exponent , among them matrix inversion, determinants and solving linear systems. Many graph algorithms reduce to matrix multiplication as well.
All improvements since 1987 use Strassen's laser method [4]. It extracts many disjoint copies of matrix multiplication from a power of an auxiliary tensor, usually the Coppersmith–Winograd tensor [5]. Schönhage's asymptotic sum inequality [3] then converts these copies into a bound on . The algorithms are galactic: their constants make them impractical. The theoretical interest lies in the exponent. Bürgisser, Clausen and Shokrollahi give a standard account [10].
References
- V. Strassen, "Gaussian elimination is not optimal", Numer. Math. 13 (1969), 354–356. doi:10.1007/BF02165411
- V. Strassen, "Vermeidung von Divisionen", J. Reine Angew. Math. 264 (1973), 184–202. doi:10.1515/crll.1973.264.184
- A. Schönhage, "Partial and total matrix multiplication", SIAM J. Comput. 10 (1981), 434–455. doi:10.1137/0210032
- V. Strassen, "Relative bilinear complexity and matrix multiplication", J. Reine Angew. Math. 375/376 (1987), 406–443. doi:10.1515/crll.1987.375-376.406
- D. Coppersmith and S. Winograd, "Matrix multiplication via arithmetic progressions", J. Symbolic Comput. 9 (1990), 251–280. doi:10.1016/S0747-7171(08)80013-2
- F. Le Gall, "Powers of tensors and fast matrix multiplication", Proc. ISSAC 2014, ACM (2014), 296–303. arXiv:1401.7714
- R. Duan, H. Wu and R. Zhou, "Faster matrix multiplication via asymmetric hashing", Proc. FOCS 2023, IEEE (2023), 2129–2138. arXiv:2210.10173
- V. Vassilevska Williams, Y. Xu, Z. Xu and R. Zhou, "New bounds for matrix multiplication: from alpha to omega", Proc. SODA 2024, SIAM (2024), 3792–3835. arXiv:2307.07970
- J. Alman, R. Duan, V. Vassilevska Williams, Y. Xu, Z. Xu and R. Zhou, "More asymmetry yields faster matrix multiplication", Proc. SODA 2025, SIAM (2025), 2005–2039. arXiv:2404.16349
- P. Bürgisser, M. Clausen and M. A. Shokrollahi, Algebraic Complexity Theory, Grundlehren Math. Wiss. 315, Springer (1997). doi:10.1007/978-3-662-03338-8
- E. Dupont, M. Eisenberger, B. Kozlovskii, A. Mehrabian, F. J. R. Ruiz, A. See, R. Zhou, J. Alman, V. Vassilevska Williams and M. Balog, "Improving the matrix multiplication exponent with modern optimization and AlphaEvolve", preprint (2026). arXiv:2608.16884
- R. Zadeh, "A faster matrix multiplication algorithm through structured optimization", preprint (2026). arXiv:2610.10593
- Z.-W. Sun, "Tensor degenerations for matrix multiplication", preprint (2026). arXiv:2610.13971
- A. Ambainis, Y. Filmus and F. Le Gall, "Fast matrix multiplication: limitations of the Coppersmith–Winograd method", Proc. STOC 2015, ACM (2015), 585–593. arXiv:1411.5414
- J. Alman and V. Vassilevska Williams, "Limits on all known (and some unknown) approaches to matrix multiplication", SIAM J. Comput. 52 (2023), FOCS18-285–FOCS18-315. doi:10.1137/19M124695X
- R. Raz, "On the complexity of matrix product", SIAM J. Comput. 32 (2003), 1356–1369. doi:10.1137/S0097539702402147
- J. M. Landsberg and M. Michałek, "A lower bound for the border rank of matrix multiplication", Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2018 (2018), 4722–4733. doi:10.1093/imrn/rnx025
- Wikipedia, Computational complexity of matrix multiplication.
Source: Giorgio Ottaviani and Philipp Reichenbach, “Tensor Rank and Complexity”, arXiv:2004.01492 (2022).
Progress summary
Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.
Solutions 3
Claimed by OpenAI.See full solution
Claims that for every epsilon > 0, two n-by-n complex matrices can be multiplied in O_epsilon(n^(9/4+epsilon)) arithmetic operations, so the complex exponent is at most 9/4; this is progress toward exponent two.
Repository: https://github.com/openai/math
- OpenAI-107-01-An-Upper-Bound-of-9-4-for-the-Matrix-Multiplication-Exponent.pdfOpen
Claimed by OpenAI.See full solution
Claims omega < 2.258, alpha > 0.465, and omega(1,0.709,1) < 2.092 over characteristic-zero fields, with the stated square and rectangular bounds outside a finite exceptional set of positive characteristics; this is progress toward exponent two.
Repository: https://github.com/openai/math
- OpenAI-107-02-Complex-Matrix-Multiplication-Below-2-258-and-Rectangular-Bounds.pdfOpen
Claimed by OpenAI.See full solution
Claims omega_F < 2.371054886006746 for every fixed field F, including every positive characteristic, in the arithmetic-operation model; this is progress toward exponent two.
Repository: https://github.com/openai/math
- OpenAI-107-03-Staggered-extraction-for-exact-matrix-multiplication-over-every-field.pdfOpen