Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated : September , 2011 Lecture 8 Jonathan
نویسنده
چکیده
MAX-IND-SET def = {(G, k) : the largest independent set in G has size exactly k} . This language does not appear to be in NP: we can certify that some graph G has an independent set of size k, but how do we certify that this is the largest independent set in G? The language does not appear to be in coNP, either: although we could prove that (G, k) 6∈ MAX-IND-SET if G happened to have an independent set of size larger than k, there is no easy way to prove that (G, k) 6∈ MAX-IND-SET in case its largest independent set has size smaller than k. As another example, consider the problem of CNF-formula minimization. A CNF formula φ on n variables naturally defines a function fφ : {0, 1}n → {0, 1}, where fφ(x) = 1 iff the given assignment x satisfies φ. Can we tell when a given formula is minimal? Consider the language
منابع مشابه
Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated : September 14 , 2011 Lecture 5
We know that there existNP-complete languages. Assuming P 6= NP, any NP-complete language lies in NP \ P. Are there languages that are neither in P nor NP-complete? Ladner’s theorem tells us that there are. As some intuition for Ladner’s theorem, take some language L ∈ NP \ P. Using padding, we will make L “easy enough” so that it can’t be NP-complete, while keeping it “hard enough” so it is no...
متن کاملNotes on Complexity Theory Last updated : December , 2011 Lecture 28
Recall that one motivation for studying non-uniform computation is the hope that it might be easier to prove lower bounds in that setting. (This is somewhat paradoxical, as non-uniform algorithms are more powerful than uniform algorithms; nevertheless, since circuits are more “combinatorial” in nature than uniform algorithms, there may still be justification for such hope.) The ultimate goal he...
متن کاملNotes on Complexity Theory Last updated : November , 2011 Lecture 22
We show here a probabilistically checkable proof for NP in which the verifier reads only a constant number of bits from the proof (and uses only polynomially many random bits). In addition to being of independent interest, this result is used as a key step in the proof of the PCP theorem itself. To show the desired result, we will work with the NP-complete language of satisfiable quadratic equa...
متن کاملNotes on Complexity Theory Last updated : November , 2011 Lecture 25
Randomization provides unconditional benefits in many settings; examples include cryptography (where random keys are used to provide protection against an adversary) and distributed computing (where randomness can be used as a means to break symmetry between parties). Randomness also appears to help in algorithm design. But is it possible that, from a complexity-theoretic perspective, randomnes...
متن کاملNotes on Complexity Theory Last updated : December , 2011 Lecture 27
We now prove Theorem 1. Let M be a probabilistic machine running in space S (and time 2S), using R ≤ 2S random bits, and deciding a language L with two-sided error. (Note that S, R are functions of the input length n, and the theorem requires S = Ω(log n).) We will assume without loss of generality that M always uses exactly R random bits on all inputs; recall also that M has read-once access t...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2011