Will resolve as YES when a problem is solved.

@AbhinavSrinivas Since a possible scenario (the most likely one, even) is that everything resolves NO, the probabilities should not be forced to add up to 100%. I'm not even sure it is possible to resolve everything NO on a dependent market?

@AbhinavSrinivas I don’t think you can after the fact if you didn’t allow additional answers from the beginning, but you could edit one to be, eg, “Riemann Hypothesis or None”. That does unfairly tip the odds toward whichever answer you select though. You could also N/A the market and make a new one.

@AbhinavSrinivas Thank you for doing so! I had briefly thought this was one of the new independent multiple choice markets.

@JimHays for instance if p vs np gets proven tomorrow, it will be resolved yes, and everything else will be resolved no. if nothing gets proven before 2030, then the whole market will be resolved no. if at any point in time none of them are proven and the largest trade was >2 weeks ago, i will resolve the whole market as n/a

Navier Stokes and P v NP are both plausible, if very unlikely, to me. Yang Mills and Riemann are jokes, no.

@ZoravurSingh I mean. Not impossible. But the idea of anyone proving Yang Mills or Riemann in the next 6 years is a joke. I don't know enough about Hodge or BSD to comment, but these two are just not happening. 0% chance. Yang Mills in particular is wild, to even get close to Yang Mills you'd be, like, solving multiple infamously open questions in Foundations of Physics. The waves that would be made from someone working towards this would be massive, ** everyone** would know, even 6 years out.

@Najawin Even given the change in question statement, I stand behind my view that Riemann and Yang Mills will not be the first to fall. With that said, as a non CS person I think I was too bullish on P v NP, simply because everyone seems to agree that the answer is "no". BSD also seems plausible, after Navier Stokes, listening to Wiles on it.