Kartik Prabhu, Thanks! That article is quite good, but I don’t think the bottom line is any different than other reports from the conference:
“The next step was the essential one — to show how the reformulation in terms of Frobenioids made it possible to bring genuinely new and powerful techniques to bear on a potential proof.These techniques appear in Mochizuki’s four IUT theory papers, which were the subject of the last two days of the conference. The job of explaining those papers fell to Chung Pang Mok of Purdue University and Yuichiro Hoshi and Go Yamashita, both colleagues of Mochizuki’s at the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences at Kyoto University. The three are among a small handful of people who have devoted intense effort to understanding Mochizuki’s IUT theory. By all accounts, their talks were impossible to follow.”
I’ll add a link to this to the posting. There is also a report on the conference from Fesenko,
which blames the audience for what happened:
“Labor omnia vincit. Progress in understanding the talks correlated with preparation efforts for the workshop. There were participants who came unprepared but were active in asking questions, many of which were already answered in recommended surveys and some of which were rather puerile.”
I’m not sure what the point of such a comment from Fesenko is, unless he’s trying to ensure that most of the experts who showed up at this workshop won’t attend future ones.