I agree that the derivation of (4) from (3) in the paper is unclear. The negation of a=b>=c.
Ah, so there are already revisions… (I didn’t have a (4) in the version I read).
I agree that the derivation of (4) from (3) in the paper is unclear. The negation of a=b>=c.
Ah, so there are already revisions… (I didn’t have a (4) in the version I read).