Four-Terminal Planar Case of the Dinitz-Garg-Goemans Cost Conjecture
Prior state unknown→disproved
restricted planar four-terminal case
SourceReplayReproducedFormal proofStatement auditExternal checkExpert reviewPeer review
algorithms-optimization / Combinatorial optimization
Four-Terminal Planar Case of the Dinitz-Garg-Goemans Cost Conjecture
Does the Dinitz-Garg-Goemans cost-preserving unsplittable-flow rounding conjecture survive on acyclic planar instances with only four terminals? An explicit instance answers no: every cost-nonincreasing unsplittable routing has upper overload at least $335$ while the maximum demand is $294$.
10Significance / 100
1Frontier events
0Verification tasks
0Recorded attempts
Temporal state
Current frontier
No reconciled state yet.
Append-only history
Frontier timeline
Research memory
Claims and attempts
Scoped claims
Does the Dinitz-Garg-Goemans cost-preserving unsplittable-flow rounding conjecture survive on acyclic planar instances with only four terminals? An explicit instance answers no: every cost-nonincreasing unsplittable routing has upper overload at least $335$ while the maximum demand is $294$.
restricted planar four-terminal case
Recorded attempts
Evidence graph
Connected research record
No public relationships recorded yet.