On the Average-Case Hardness of Total Search Problems by Chethan Kamath January, 2020

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

On the Average-Case Hardness of Total Search Problems by Chethan Kamath January, 2020 A thesis presented to the Graduate School of the Institute of Science and Technology Austria, Klosterneuburg, Austria in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The thesis of Chethan Kamath, titled On the Average-Case Hardness of Total Search Problems, is approved by: Supervisor: Krzysztof Pietrzak, IST Austria, Klosterneuburg, Austria Signature: Committee Member: Vladimir Kolmogorov, IST Austria, Klosterneuburg, Austria Signature: Committee Member: Alon Rosen, IDC Herzliya, Israel Signature: Defense Chair: Calin G˘uet,IST Austria, Klosterneuburg, Austria Signature: c by Chethan Kamath, January, 2020 All Rights Reserved The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Unless otherwise indicated, its contents are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Under this license, you may copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. You may also create and distribute modified versions of the work. This is on the condition that: you credit the author and do not use it, or any derivative works, for a commercial purpose. IST Austria Thesis, ISSN: 2663-337X I hereby declare that this thesis is my own work and that it does not contain other people's work without this being so stated; this thesis does not contain my previous work without this being stated, and the bibliography contains all the literature that I used in writing the dissertation. I declare that this is a true copy of my thesis, including any final revisions, as approved by my thesis committee, and that this thesis has not been submitted for a higher degree to any other university or institution. I certify that any republication of materials presented in this thesis has been approved by the relevant publishers and co-authors. Signature: Chethan Kamath January, 2020 v Abstract A search problem lies in the complexity class FNP if a solution to the given instance of the problem can be verified efficiently. The complexity class TFNP consists of all search problems in FNP that are total in the sense that a solution is guaranteed to exist. TFNP contains a host of interesting problems from fields such as algorithmic game theory, computational topology, number theory and combinatorics. Since TFNP is a semantic class, it is unlikely to have a complete problem. Instead, one studies its syntactic subclasses which are defined based on the combinatorial principle used to argue totality. Of particular interest is the subclass PPAD, which contains important problems like computing Nash equilibrium for bimatrix games and computational counterparts of several fixed-point theorems as complete. In the thesis, we undertake the study of average- case hardness of TFNP, and in particular its subclass PPAD. Almost nothing was known about average-case hardness of PPAD before a series of recent results showed how to achieve it using a cryptographic primitive called program ob- fuscation. However, it is currently not known how to construct program obfuscation from standard cryptographic assumptions. Therefore, it is desirable to relax the assumption under which average-case hardness of PPAD can be shown. In the thesis we take a step in this direction. First, we show that assuming the (average-case) hardness of a number theoretic problem related to factoring of integers, which we call Iterated-Squaring, PPAD is hard-on-average in the random-oracle model. Then we strengthen this result to show that the average-case hardness of PPAD reduces to the (adaptive) soundness of the Fiat-Shamir Transform, a well-known technique used to compile a public-coin interactive protocol into a non-interactive one. As a corollary, we obtain average-case hardness for PPAD in the random-oracle model assuming the worst-case hardness of #SAT. More- over, the above results can all be strengthened to obtain average-case hardness for the class CLS ⊆ PPAD. Our main technical contribution is constructing incrementally-verifiable procedures for computing Iterated-Squaring and #SAT. By incrementally-verifiable, we mean that every intermediate state of the computation includes a proof of its correctness, and the proof can be updated and verified in polynomial time. Previous constructions of such procedures relied on strong, non-standard assumptions. Instead, we introduce a technique called recursive proof-merging to obtain the same from weaker assumptions. vi Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my adviser, Krzysztof, for handing me an opportunity to pursue a PhD. Krzysztof is a unending source of inter- esting problems and more often than not to their solutions. I really appreciate his calm, patient approach to guidance, which allowed me develop not only as a researcher but also as a person during my PhD. Secondly I would like to profusely thank Alon and Pavel: Alon for having given me the chance to visit IDC Herzliya, and Pavel for his tutelage during my time there. The discussions with Alon and Pavel were enlightening, and enabled me to appreciate both the intuitive and meticulous nature of research. The inception of this thesis can be back traced to the research conducted during this visit. I would also like to give special thanks to Georg for having co-supervised me during the early phase of the PhD, Vladimir for being part of my committee, and Calin for agreeing to chair my defense. I am grateful to the co-authors of all the papers that I was involved during my PhD. In particular, I would like to thank the co-authors of the two papers that constitute the bulk of this thesis: they were closely involved not only in developing most of the ideas therein, but also in writing most of its content. (They say that a thesis doesn't write itself, but in my case it mostly did.) For the six memorable years I am thankful to my colleagues and friends at IST Austria, particularly to the members of our group over the years (Benedikt, Guille, Hamza, Jo¨el, Karen, Maciej, Michal, Michael, Michelle, Peter and the numerous interns), with whom I had great discussions and even more fun. I also thank Stephan and Simon for their warm friendship and constant company which helped me plough through the PhD. Finally I would like to thank my family for their unwavering support. I gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the IST Austria Excellence Schol- arship during my first year and European Research Council starting grant (259668-PSPC) and consolidator grant (682815-TOCNeT) during the rest of the PhD, which allowed me to focus on research without any monetary bothers. vii About the Author Chethan Kamath obtained his B.Tech degree in Computer Science from University of Kerala (at TKM College of Engineering) in 2009. In 2010 he joined Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore for an M.Sc in Computer Science with focus on cryptography. After its completion, he joined Institute of Science and Technology Austria in 2014 for his Ph.D studies in the group of Krzysztof Pietrzak. His research interests include foundations of cryptography, computational complexity theory, and theoretical computer science in general. viii List of Publications 1. Choudhuri, A. R., Hub´aˇcek,P., Kamath, C., Pietrzak, K., Rosen, A., and Rothblum, G. N. Finding a Nash equilibrium is no easier than breaking Fiat-Shamir. 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing { STOC 2019:1103{ 1114. 2. Choudhuri, A. R., Hub´aˇcek,P., Kamath, C., Pietrzak, K., Rosen, A., and Rothblum, G. N. PPAD-hardness via iterated squaring modulo a composite. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2019/667, 2019. ix Table of Contents Abstract v Acknowledgments vi About the Author vii List of Publications viii List of Figures x List of Abbreviations xi 1 Introduction xii 1.1 Total Search Problems . .1 1.2 Cryptography and Total Search Problems . 11 1.3 Overview of the Thesis . 15 2 Background 26 2.1 Definitions . 27 2.2 Hardness in PPAD ............................... 29 2.3 Hardness in CLS ................................ 33 2.4 Relaxing the SVL Problem . 34 3 PPAD-Hardness from Iterated-Squaring 37 3.1 Hardness Assumption . 37 3.2 Pietrzak's Proof System . 41 3.3 The Reduction . 48 4 PPAD-Hardness and the Fiat-Shamir Methodology 60 4.1 Overview . 61 4.2 The Sumcheck Protocol . 70 4.3 The Reduction . 79 4.4 Instantiating Fiat-Shamir . 90 5 Conclusions and Future Directions 99 Bibliography 103 A Missing Proofs 113 A.1 Proof of Lemma 5 . 113 x List of Figures 1.1 Sperner's Lemma . .2 1.2 The TFNP landscape . .5 1.3 Sample Lonely instance . .6 1.4 Problems in TFNP ...............................8 1.5 Sample End-of-Line instance . 10 1.6 Sperner is Karp-reducible to End-of-Line ................. 11 1.7 The Fiat-Shamir Transform . 17 1.8 Sample Sink-of-Verifiable-Line instance . 19 1.9 The halving sub-protocol . 21 2.1 Simulating S and P using reversible pebbling. 32 2.2 Sample Relaxed-Sink-of-Verifiable-Line instance . 34 3.1 Recursive structure of the RSVL instance. 53 3.2 Labels of RSVL instance. 54 4.1 The Sumcheck Protocol . 72 4.2 Sumcheck Protocol with prefixes. 73 4.3 Non-interactive Sumcheck Protocol with prefixes. 77 5.1 Factoring and its related assumptions. 101 xi List of Abbreviations Complexity classes: NP Non-deterministic Polynomial-time FNP Functional Non-deterministic Polynomial-time TFNP Total Functional Non-deterministic Polynomial-time PTFNP Provable Total Functional Non-deterministic Polynomial-time PPP Polynomial Pigeonhole Principle PWPP Polynomial Weak Pigeonhole Principle PPA
Recommended publications
  • Complexity Theory Lecture 9 Co-NP Co-NP-Complete

    Complexity Theory Lecture 9 Co-NP Co-NP-Complete

    Complexity Theory 1 Complexity Theory 2 co-NP Complexity Theory Lecture 9 As co-NP is the collection of complements of languages in NP, and P is closed under complementation, co-NP can also be characterised as the collection of languages of the form: ′ L = x y y <p( x ) R (x, y) { |∀ | | | | → } Anuj Dawar University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory NP – the collection of languages with succinct certificates of Easter Term 2010 membership. co-NP – the collection of languages with succinct certificates of http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/0910/Complexity/ disqualification. Anuj Dawar May 14, 2010 Anuj Dawar May 14, 2010 Complexity Theory 3 Complexity Theory 4 NP co-NP co-NP-complete P VAL – the collection of Boolean expressions that are valid is co-NP-complete. Any language L that is the complement of an NP-complete language is co-NP-complete. Any of the situations is consistent with our present state of ¯ knowledge: Any reduction of a language L1 to L2 is also a reduction of L1–the complement of L1–to L¯2–the complement of L2. P = NP = co-NP • There is an easy reduction from the complement of SAT to VAL, P = NP co-NP = NP = co-NP • ∩ namely the map that takes an expression to its negation. P = NP co-NP = NP = co-NP • ∩ VAL P P = NP = co-NP ∈ ⇒ P = NP co-NP = NP = co-NP • ∩ VAL NP NP = co-NP ∈ ⇒ Anuj Dawar May 14, 2010 Anuj Dawar May 14, 2010 Complexity Theory 5 Complexity Theory 6 Prime Numbers Primality Consider the decision problem PRIME: Another way of putting this is that Composite is in NP.
  • Chapter 7 Planar Graphs

    Chapter 7 Planar Graphs

    Chapter 7 Planar graphs In full: 7.1–7.3 Parts of: 7.4, 7.6–7.8 Skip: 7.5 Prof. Tesler Math 154 Winter 2020 Prof. Tesler Ch. 7: Planar Graphs Math 154 / Winter 2020 1 / 52 Planar graphs Definition A planar embedding of a graph is a drawing of the graph in the plane without edges crossing. A graph is planar if a planar embedding of it exists. Consider two drawings of the graph K4: V = f1, 2, 3, 4g E = f1, 2g , f1, 3g , f1, 4g , f2, 3g , f2, 4g , f3, 4g 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 4 Non−planar embedding Planar embedding The abstract graph K4 is planar because it can be drawn in the plane without crossing edges. Prof. Tesler Ch. 7: Planar Graphs Math 154 / Winter 2020 2 / 52 How about K5? Both of these drawings of K5 have crossing edges. We will develop methods to prove that K5 is not a planar graph, and to characterize what graphs are planar. Prof. Tesler Ch. 7: Planar Graphs Math 154 / Winter 2020 3 / 52 Euler’s Theorem on Planar Graphs Let G be a connected planar graph (drawn w/o crossing edges). Define V = number of vertices E = number of edges F = number of faces, including the “infinite” face Then V - E + F = 2. Note: This notation conflicts with standard graph theory notation V and E for the sets of vertices and edges. Alternately, use jV(G)j - jE(G)j + jF(G)j = 2. Example face 3 V = 4 E = 6 face 1 F = 4 face 4 (infinite face) face 2 V - E + F = 4 - 6 + 4 = 2 Prof.
  • NP-Completeness: Reductions Tue, Nov 21, 2017

    NP-Completeness: Reductions Tue, Nov 21, 2017

    CMSC 451 Dave Mount CMSC 451: Lecture 19 NP-Completeness: Reductions Tue, Nov 21, 2017 Reading: Chapt. 8 in KT and Chapt. 8 in DPV. Some of the reductions discussed here are not in either text. Recap: We have introduced a number of concepts on the way to defining NP-completeness: Decision Problems/Language recognition: are problems for which the answer is either yes or no. These can also be thought of as language recognition problems, assuming that the input has been encoded as a string. For example: HC = fG j G has a Hamiltonian cycleg MST = f(G; c) j G has a MST of cost at most cg: P: is the class of all decision problems which can be solved in polynomial time. While MST 2 P, we do not know whether HC 2 P (but we suspect not). Certificate: is a piece of evidence that allows us to verify in polynomial time that a string is in a given language. For example, the language HC above, a certificate could be a sequence of vertices along the cycle. (If the string is not in the language, the certificate can be anything.) NP: is defined to be the class of all languages that can be verified in polynomial time. (Formally, it stands for Nondeterministic Polynomial time.) Clearly, P ⊆ NP. It is widely believed that P 6= NP. To define NP-completeness, we need to introduce the concept of a reduction. Reductions: The class of NP-complete problems consists of a set of decision problems (languages) (a subset of the class NP) that no one knows how to solve efficiently, but if there were a polynomial time solution for even a single NP-complete problem, then every problem in NP would be solvable in polynomial time.
  • Computational Complexity: a Modern Approach

    Computational Complexity: a Modern Approach

    i Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach Draft of a book: Dated January 2007 Comments welcome! Sanjeev Arora and Boaz Barak Princeton University [email protected] Not to be reproduced or distributed without the authors’ permission This is an Internet draft. Some chapters are more finished than others. References and attributions are very preliminary and we apologize in advance for any omissions (but hope you will nevertheless point them out to us). Please send us bugs, typos, missing references or general comments to [email protected] — Thank You!! DRAFT ii DRAFT Chapter 9 Complexity of counting “It is an empirical fact that for many combinatorial problems the detection of the existence of a solution is easy, yet no computationally efficient method is known for counting their number.... for a variety of problems this phenomenon can be explained.” L. Valiant 1979 The class NP captures the difficulty of finding certificates. However, in many contexts, one is interested not just in a single certificate, but actually counting the number of certificates. This chapter studies #P, (pronounced “sharp p”), a complexity class that captures this notion. Counting problems arise in diverse fields, often in situations having to do with estimations of probability. Examples include statistical estimation, statistical physics, network design, and more. Counting problems are also studied in a field of mathematics called enumerative combinatorics, which tries to obtain closed-form mathematical expressions for counting problems. To give an example, in the 19th century Kirchoff showed how to count the number of spanning trees in a graph using a simple determinant computation. Results in this chapter will show that for many natural counting problems, such efficiently computable expressions are unlikely to exist.
  • NP-Completeness Part I

    NP-Completeness Part I

    NP-Completeness Part I Outline for Today ● Recap from Last Time ● Welcome back from break! Let's make sure we're all on the same page here. ● Polynomial-Time Reducibility ● Connecting problems together. ● NP-Completeness ● What are the hardest problems in NP? ● The Cook-Levin Theorem ● A concrete NP-complete problem. Recap from Last Time The Limits of Computability EQTM EQTM co-RE R RE LD LD ADD HALT ATM HALT ATM 0*1* The Limits of Efficient Computation P NP R P and NP Refresher ● The class P consists of all problems solvable in deterministic polynomial time. ● The class NP consists of all problems solvable in nondeterministic polynomial time. ● Equivalently, NP consists of all problems for which there is a deterministic, polynomial-time verifier for the problem. Reducibility Maximum Matching ● Given an undirected graph G, a matching in G is a set of edges such that no two edges share an endpoint. ● A maximum matching is a matching with the largest number of edges. AA maximummaximum matching.matching. Maximum Matching ● Jack Edmonds' paper “Paths, Trees, and Flowers” gives a polynomial-time algorithm for finding maximum matchings. ● (This is the same Edmonds as in “Cobham- Edmonds Thesis.) ● Using this fact, what other problems can we solve? Domino Tiling Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling Solving Domino Tiling The Setup ● To determine whether you can place at least k dominoes on a crossword grid, do the following: ● Convert the grid into a graph: each empty cell is a node, and any two adjacent empty cells have an edge between them.
  • An Introduction to Graph Colouring

    An Introduction to Graph Colouring

    An Introduction to Graph Colouring Evelyne Smith-Roberge University of Waterloo March 29, 2017 Recap... Last week, we covered: I What is a graph? I Eulerian circuits I Hamiltonian Cycles I Planarity Reminder: A graph G is: I a set V (G) of objects called vertices together with: I a set E(G), of what we call called edges. An edge is an unordered pair of vertices. We call two vertices adjacent if they are connected by an edge. Today, we'll get into... I Planarity in more detail I The four colour theorem I Vertex Colouring I Edge Colouring Recall... Planarity We said last week that a graph is planar if it can be drawn in such a way that no edges cross. These areas, including the infinite area surrounding the graph, are called faces. We denote the set of faces of a graph G by F (G). Planarity You'll notice the edges of planar graphs cut up our space into different sections. ) Planarity You'll notice the edges of planar graphs cut up our space into different sections. ) These areas, including the infinite area surrounding the graph, are called faces. We denote the set of faces of a graph G by F (G). Degree of a Vertex Last week, we defined the degree of a vertex to be the number of edges that had that vertex as an endpoint. In this graph, for example, each of the vertices has degree 3. Degree of a Face Similarly, we can define the degree of a face. The degree of a face is the number of edges that make up the boundary of that face.
  • LSPACE VS NP IS AS HARD AS P VS NP 1. Introduction in Complexity

    LSPACE VS NP IS AS HARD AS P VS NP 1. Introduction in Complexity

    LSPACE VS NP IS AS HARD AS P VS NP FRANK VEGA Abstract. The P versus NP problem is a major unsolved problem in com- puter science. This consists in knowing the answer of the following question: Is P equal to NP? Another major complexity classes are LSPACE, PSPACE, ESPACE, E and EXP. Whether LSPACE = P is a fundamental question that it is as important as it is unresolved. We show if P = NP, then LSPACE = NP. Consequently, if LSPACE is not equal to NP, then P is not equal to NP. According to Lance Fortnow, it seems that LSPACE versus NP is easier to be proven. However, with this proof we show this problem is as hard as P versus NP. Moreover, we prove the complexity class P is not equal to PSPACE as a direct consequence of this result. Furthermore, we demonstrate if PSPACE is not equal to EXP, then P is not equal to NP. In addition, if E = ESPACE, then P is not equal to NP. 1. Introduction In complexity theory, a function problem is a computational problem where a single output is expected for every input, but the output is more complex than that of a decision problem [6]. A functional problem F is defined as a binary relation (x; y) 2 R over strings of an arbitrary alphabet Σ: R ⊂ Σ∗ × Σ∗: A Turing machine M solves F if for every input x such that there exists a y satisfying (x; y) 2 R, M produces one such y, that is M(x) = y [6].
  • CS286.2 Lectures 5-6: Introduction to Hamiltonian Complexity, QMA-Completeness of the Local Hamiltonian Problem

    CS286.2 Lectures 5-6: Introduction to Hamiltonian Complexity, QMA-Completeness of the Local Hamiltonian Problem

    CS286.2 Lectures 5-6: Introduction to Hamiltonian Complexity, QMA-completeness of the Local Hamiltonian problem Scribe: Jenish C. Mehta The Complexity Class BQP The complexity class BQP is the quantum analog of the class BPP. It consists of all languages that can be decided in quantum polynomial time. More formally, Definition 1. A language L 2 BQP if there exists a classical polynomial time algorithm A that ∗ maps inputs x 2 f0, 1g to quantum circuits Cx on n = poly(jxj) qubits, where the circuit is considered a sequence of unitary operators each on 2 qubits, i.e Cx = UTUT−1...U1 where each 2 2 Ui 2 L C ⊗ C , such that: 2 i. Completeness: x 2 L ) Pr(Cx accepts j0ni) ≥ 3 1 ii. Soundness: x 62 L ) Pr(Cx accepts j0ni) ≤ 3 We say that the circuit “Cx accepts jyi” if the first output qubit measured in Cxjyi is 0. More j0i specifically, letting P1 = j0ih0j1 be the projection of the first qubit on state j0i, j0i 2 Pr(Cx accepts jyi) =k (P1 ⊗ In−1)Cxjyi k2 The Complexity Class QMA The complexity class QMA (or BQNP, as Kitaev originally named it) is the quantum analog of the class NP. More formally, Definition 2. A language L 2 QMA if there exists a classical polynomial time algorithm A that ∗ maps inputs x 2 f0, 1g to quantum circuits Cx on n + q = poly(jxj) qubits, such that: 2q i. Completeness: x 2 L ) 9jyi 2 C , kjyik2 = 1, such that Pr(Cx accepts j0ni ⊗ 2 jyi) ≥ 3 2q 1 ii.
  • Survey of the Computational Complexity of Finding a Nash Equilibrium

    Survey of the Computational Complexity of Finding a Nash Equilibrium

    Survey of the Computational Complexity of Finding a Nash Equilibrium Valerie Ishida 22 April 2009 1 Abstract This survey reviews the complexity classes of interest for describing the problem of finding a Nash Equilibrium, the reductions that led to the conclusion that finding a Nash Equilibrium of a game in the normal form is PPAD-complete, and the reduction from a succinct game with a nice expected utility function to finding a Nash Equilibrium in a normal form game with two players. 2 Introduction 2.1 Motivation For many years it was unknown whether a Nash Equilibrium of a normal form game could be found in polynomial time. The motivation for being able to due so is to find game solutions that people are satisfied with. Consider an entertaining game that some friends are playing. If there is a set of strategies that constitutes and equilibrium each person will probably be satisfied. Likewise if financial games such as auctions could be solved in polynomial time in a way that all of the participates were satisfied that they could not do any better given the situation, then that would be great. There has been much progress made in the last fifty years toward finding the complexity of this problem. It turns out to be a hard problem unless PPAD = FP. This survey reviews the complexity classes of interest for describing the prob- lem of finding a Nash Equilibrium, the reductions that led to the conclusion that finding a Nash Equilibrium of a game in the normal form is PPAD-complete, and the reduction from a succinct game with a nice expected utility function to finding a Nash Equilibrium in a normal form game with two players.
  • V=Ih0cpr745fm

    V=Ih0cpr745fm

    MITOCW | watch?v=Ih0cPR745fM The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare continue to offer high quality educational resources for free. To make a donation or to view additional materials from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare at ocw.mit.edu. PROFESSOR: Today we have a lecturer, guest lecture two of two, Costis Daskalakis. COSTIS Glad to be back. So let's continue on the path we followed last time. Let me remind DASKALAKIS: you what we did last time, first of all. So I talked about interesting theorems in topology-- Nash, Sperner, and Brouwer. And I defined the corresponding-- so these were theorems in topology. Define the corresponding problems. And because of these existence theorems, the corresponding search problems were total. And then I looked into the problems in NP that are total, and I tried to identify what in these problems make them total and tried to identify combinatorial argument that guarantees the existence of solutions in these problems. Motivated by the argument, which turned out to be a parity argument on directed graphs, I defined the class PPAD, and I introduced the problem of ArithmCircuitSAT, which is PPAD complete, and from which I promised to show a bunch of PPAD hardness deductions this time. So let me remind you the salient points from this list before I keep going. So first of all, the PPAD class has a combinatorial flavor. In the definition of the class, what I'm doing is I'm defining a graph on all possible n-bit strings, so an exponentially large set by providing two circuits, P and N.
  • The Classes FNP and TFNP

    The Classes FNP and TFNP

    Outline The classes FNP and TFNP C. Wilson1 1Lane Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering West Virginia University Christopher Wilson Function Problems Outline Outline 1 Function Problems defined What are Function Problems? FSAT Defined TSP Defined 2 Relationship between Function and Decision Problems RL Defined Reductions between Function Problems 3 Total Functions Defined Total Functions Defined FACTORING HAPPYNET ANOTHER HAMILTON CYCLE Christopher Wilson Function Problems Outline Outline 1 Function Problems defined What are Function Problems? FSAT Defined TSP Defined 2 Relationship between Function and Decision Problems RL Defined Reductions between Function Problems 3 Total Functions Defined Total Functions Defined FACTORING HAPPYNET ANOTHER HAMILTON CYCLE Christopher Wilson Function Problems Outline Outline 1 Function Problems defined What are Function Problems? FSAT Defined TSP Defined 2 Relationship between Function and Decision Problems RL Defined Reductions between Function Problems 3 Total Functions Defined Total Functions Defined FACTORING HAPPYNET ANOTHER HAMILTON CYCLE Christopher Wilson Function Problems Function Problems What are Function Problems? Function Problems FSAT Defined Total Functions TSP Defined Outline 1 Function Problems defined What are Function Problems? FSAT Defined TSP Defined 2 Relationship between Function and Decision Problems RL Defined Reductions between Function Problems 3 Total Functions Defined Total Functions Defined FACTORING HAPPYNET ANOTHER HAMILTON CYCLE Christopher Wilson Function Problems Function
  • What Is a Polyhedron?

    What Is a Polyhedron?

    3. POLYHEDRA, GRAPHS AND SURFACES 3.1. From Polyhedra to Graphs What is a Polyhedron? Now that we’ve covered lots of geometry in two dimensions, let’s make things just a little more difficult. We’re going to consider geometric objects in three dimensions which can be made from two-dimensional pieces. For example, you can take six squares all the same size and glue them together to produce the shape which we call a cube. More generally, if you take a bunch of polygons and glue them together so that no side gets left unglued, then the resulting object is usually called a polyhedron.1 The corners of the polygons are called vertices, the sides of the polygons are called edges and the polygons themselves are called faces. So, for example, the cube has 8 vertices, 12 edges and 6 faces. Different people seem to define polyhedra in very slightly different ways. For our purposes, we will need to add one little extra condition — that the volume bound by a polyhedron “has no holes”. For example, consider the shape obtained by drilling a square hole straight through the centre of a cube. Even though the surface of such a shape can be constructed by gluing together polygons, we don’t consider this shape to be a polyhedron, because of the hole. We say that a polyhedron is convex if, for each plane which lies along a face, the polyhedron lies on one side of that plane. So, for example, the cube is a convex polyhedron while the more complicated spec- imen of a polyhedron pictured on the right is certainly not convex.