verifying

Finally, if the paper is wrong or not, at least it is a very good overview of the application of approximators in monotone complexity.

@Clement C. My personal assessment is that the paper is very well written, goes directly to the point, explains very well previous techniques (namely, Berg approximators for monotone circuits), and explains very clearly his approach to deal with negations. Additionally, the paper is well written enough so that any body familiar with berg approximators would be able to decide if it is correct by dedicating no more than a week of careful reading. Writing an answer pointing the potential flaw would save a lot of time from a lot of people. That's what I mean with the number of views.

@Kaveh This question has 30 upvotes and 3k views in just two days. Although the rule you based your vote has a lot of sense, it does not seem reasonable to apply it blindly to every paper.