DOCSLIB.ORG

5. Polynomial Hierarchy.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
5. Polynomial Hierarchy.Pdf Polynomial Hierarchy \A polynomial-bounded version of Kleene's Arithmetic Hierarchy becomes trivial if P = NP." Karp, 1972 Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 1/44 Larry Stockmeyer and Albert Meyer introduced polynomial hierarchy. 1. Larry Stockmeyer and Albert Meyer. The Equivalence Problem for Regular Expressions with Squaring Requires Exponential Space. SWAT'72. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 2/44 Synopsis 1. Meyer-Stockmeyer's Polynomial Hierarchy 2. Stockmeyer-Wrathall Characterization 3. Chandra-Kozen-Stockmeyer Theorem 4. Infinite Hierarchy Conjecture 5. Time-Space Trade-Off Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 3/44 Meyer-Stockmeyer's Polynomial Hierarchy Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 4/44 Problem Beyond NP Meyer and Stockmeyer observed that MINIMAL does not seem to have short witnesses. MINIMAL = f' j ' DNF ^ 8 DNF :j j<j'j ) 9u::( (u),'(u))g: Notice that MINIMAL can be solved by an NDTM that queries SAT a polynomial time. I Why DNF? Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 5/44 [ PC = PA; A2C [ NPC = NPA: A2C Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 6/44 Meyer-Stockmeyer's Definition p p p The complexity classes Σi ; Πi ; ∆i are defined as follows: p Σ0 = P; p p Σi Σi+1 = NP ; p p Σi ∆i+1 = P ; p p Πi = Σi : The following hold: p p p I Σi ⊆ ∆i+1 ⊆ Σi+1, p p p I Πi ⊆ ∆i+1 ⊆ Πi+1. p p Σi Notice that Πi+1 = coNP by definition. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 7/44 S p The polynomial hierarchy is the complexity class PH = i≥0 Σi . Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 8/44 Natural Problem in the Second Level \Synthesizing circuits is exceedingly difficult. It is even more difficult to show that a circuit found in this way is the most economical one to realize a function. The difficulty springs from the large number of essentially different networks available." Claude Shannon, 1949 p Umans showed in 1998 that the following language is Σ2-complete. MIN-EQ-DNF = fh'; ki j ' DNF ^ 9 DNF :j j ≤ k ^ 8u: (u) , '(u)g: I MIN-EQ-DNF is the problem referred to by Shannon. I The complexity of MINIMAL, as well as MINIMAL, is not known. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 9/44 Natural Problem in the Second Level SUCCINCT SET COVER: Given a set S = f'1;:::;'mg of 3-DNF's and an integer k, is there a subset 0 W S ⊆ f1;:::; mg of size at most k such that i2S0 'i is a tautology? p This is another Σ2-complete problem. 1. C. Umans. The Minimum Equivalent DNF Problem and Shortest Implicants. JCSS, 597-611, 2001. Preliminary version in FOCS 1998. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 10 / 44 Natural Problem in the Second Level EXACT INDSET refers to the following problem: fhG; ki j the largest independent sets of G are of size kg: p It is in ∆2 and is DP-complete. L 2 DP if L = L0 \ L1 for some L0 2 NP and some L1 2 coNP. Clearly NP; coNP ⊆ DP: Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 11 / 44 Stockmeyer-Wrathall Characterization Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 12 / 44 In 1976, Stockmeyer defined Polynomial Hierarchy in terms of alternation of quantifier and Wrathall proved that it is equivalent to the original definition. 1. Larry Stockmeyer. The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. Theoretical Computer Science, 3:1-22, 1976. 2. Celia Wrathall. Complete Sets and the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. Theoretical Computer Science. 3:23-33, 1976. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 13 / 44 Logical Characterization The following result generalizes the logical characterization of NP problems. Theorem. Suppose i ≥ 1. p ∗ I L 2 Σi iff there exists a P-time TM M and a polynomial q such that for all x 2 f0; 1g , q(jxj) q(jxj) q(jxj) x 2 L iff 9u12f0; 1g 8u22f0; 1g ::: Qi ui 2f0; 1g :M(x; ue) = 1: p ∗ I L 2 Πi iff there exists a P-time TM M and a polynomial q such that for all x 2 f0; 1g , q(jxj) q(jxj) q(jxj) x 2 L iff 8u12f0; 1g 9u22f0; 1g ::: Qi ui 2f0; 1g :M(x; ue) = 1: 1. Celia Wrathall. Complete Sets and the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. Theoretical Computer Science. 3:23-33, 1976. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 14 / 44 Proof of Wrathall Theorem Let M be a P-time TM and q a polynomial such that x 2 L if and only if q(jxj) q(jxj) 9u1 2 f0; 1g ::: Qui+1 2 f0; 1g :M(x; u1;:::; ui+1) = 1: Given x an NDTM guesses a u1 and asks if the following is true q(jxj) q(jxj) 8u2 2 f0; 1g ::: Qui+1 2 f0; 1g :M(x; u1;:::; ui+1) = 1: p By induction hypothesis the above formula can be evaluated by querying a Σi oracle. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 15 / 44 Proof of Wrathall Theorem p Let L be decided by a P-time NDTM N with access to some oracle A 2 Σi . Now by Cook-Levin Theorem, x 2 L if and only if 9ez:9c1;:::; cm; a1;:::; ak :9u1;:::; uk :(N accepts x using choices c1;:::; cm V and answers a1;:::; ak to the queries u1;:::; uk ) ^ ( i2[k] ai = 1 ) ui 2 A) V ^ ( i2[k] ai = 0 ) ui 2 A), where ez are introduced by the Cook-Levin reduction. We are done by induction. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 16 / 44 Σi SAT LetΣ i SAT be the subset of TQBF that consists of all tautologies of the following form 9u18u2 ::: Qi ui :'(u1;:::; ui ); where '(u1;:::; ui ) is a propositional formula. p Theorem (Meyer and Stockmeyer, 1972). Σi SAT is Σi -complete. Proof. p Clearly Σi SAT 2 Σi . The completeness is defined with regards to Karp reduction. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 17 / 44 Theorem (Stockmeyer, Wrathall, 1976). PH ⊆ PSPACE. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 18 / 44 Chandra-Kozen-Stockmeyer Theorem Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 19 / 44 Ashok Chandra, Dexter Kozen and Larry Stockmeyer introduced Alternating Turing Machines that give alternative characterization of complexity classes. 1. Alternation. Journal of the ACM, 28(1):114-133, 1981. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 20 / 44 Alternating Turing Machine An Alternating Turing Machine (ATM) is an NDTM in which every state is labeled by an element of f9; 8; accept; haltg. We say that an ATM A accepts x if there is a subtree Tr of the execution tree of A(x) satisfying the following: I The initial configuration is in Tr. I All leaves of Tr are labeled by accept. I If a node labeled by 8 is in Tr, both children are in Tr. I If a node labeled by 9 is in Tr, one of its children is in Tr. NDTM's are ATM's. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 21 / 44 Complexity via ATM For every T : N ! N, we say that an ATM A runs in T (n)-time if for every input ∗ x 2 f0; 1g and for all nondeterministic choices, A halts after at most T (jxj) steps. I ATIME(T (n)) contains L if there is a cT (n)-time ATM A for some constant c ∗ such that, for all x 2 f0; 1g , x 2 L if and only if A(x) = 1. I ASPACE(S(n)) is defined analogously. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 22 / 44 Example of ATM TQBF is solvable by an ATM in quadratic time and linear space. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 23 / 44 Complexity Class via ATM AL = ASPACE(log n); [ AP = ATIME(nc ); c>0 [ APSPACE = ASPACE(nc ); c>0 [ c AEXP = ATIME(2n ); c>0 [ c AEXPSPACE = ASPACE(2n ): c>0 Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 24 / 44 Theorem. Assume that the relevant time/space functions are constructible. 1. NSPACE(S(n)) ⊆ ATIME(S 2(n)). 2. ATIME(T (n)) ⊆ SPACE(T (n)). S S(n) 3. ASPACE(S(n)) ⊆ c>0 TIME(c ). 4. TIME(T (n)) ⊆ ASPACE(log T (n)). 1. Savitch's proof. Recursive calls are implemented using 8-state. We need to assume that S(n) is constructible in S(n)2 time. 2. Traversal of configuration tree. Counters of length T (n). We need to assume that T (n) is also space constructible. 3. Depth first traversal of configuration graph. 4. Backward guessing (9) and parallel checking (8) in the configuration circuit. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 25 / 44 Chandra-Kozen-Stockmeyer Theorem AL ⊆ AP ⊆ APSPACE ⊆ AEXP ::: = = = = ::: L ⊆ P ⊆ PSPACE ⊆ EXP ⊆ EXPSPACE ::: Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 26 / 44 Bounded Alternation L 2 Σi TIME(T (n))=Πi TIME(T (n)) if L is accepted by an O(T (n))-time ATM A with qstart labeled by 9=8, and on every path the machine A may alternate at most i − 1 times. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 27 / 44 Polynomial Hierarchy Defined via ATM Theorem. For every i ≥ 1, the following hold: p [ c Σi = Σi TIME(n ); c>0 p [ c Πi = Πi TIME(n ): c>0 Use the logical characterization. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 28 / 44 Infinite Hierarchy Conjecture Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Polynomial Hierarchy 29 / 44 Theorem. If NP = P then PH = P. p p p Σi P Suppose Σi = P.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Randomness Complexity of Interactive Proofs and Statistical Zero-Knowledge Proofs*
    On the Randomness Complexity of Interactive Proofs and Statistical Zero-Knowledge Proofs* Benny Applebaum† Eyal Golombek* Abstract We study the randomness complexity of interactive proofs and zero-knowledge proofs. In particular, we ask whether it is possible to reduce the randomness complexity, R, of the verifier to be comparable with the number of bits, CV , that the verifier sends during the interaction. We show that such randomness sparsification is possible in several settings. Specifically, unconditional sparsification can be obtained in the non-uniform setting (where the verifier is modelled as a circuit), and in the uniform setting where the parties have access to a (reusable) common-random-string (CRS). We further show that constant-round uniform protocols can be sparsified without a CRS under a plausible worst-case complexity-theoretic assumption that was used previously in the context of derandomization. All the above sparsification results preserve statistical-zero knowledge provided that this property holds against a cheating verifier. We further show that randomness sparsification can be applied to honest-verifier statistical zero-knowledge (HVSZK) proofs at the expense of increasing the communica- tion from the prover by R−F bits, or, in the case of honest-verifier perfect zero-knowledge (HVPZK) by slowing down the simulation by a factor of 2R−F . Here F is a new measure of accessible bit complexity of an HVZK proof system that ranges from 0 to R, where a maximal grade of R is achieved when zero- knowledge holds against a “semi-malicious” verifier that maliciously selects its random tape and then plays honestly.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Complexity Zoo
    The Complexity Zoo Scott Aaronson www.ScottAaronson.com LATEX Translation by Chris Bourke [email protected] 417 classes and counting 1 Contents 1 About This Document 3 2 Introductory Essay 4 2.1 Recommended Further Reading ......................... 4 2.2 Other Theory Compendia ............................ 5 2.3 Errors? ....................................... 5 3 Pronunciation Guide 6 4 Complexity Classes 10 5 Special Zoo Exhibit: Classes of Quantum States and Probability Distribu- tions 110 6 Acknowledgements 116 7 Bibliography 117 2 1 About This Document What is this? Well its a PDF version of the website www.ComplexityZoo.com typeset in LATEX using the complexity package. Well, what’s that? The original Complexity Zoo is a website created by Scott Aaronson which contains a (more or less) comprehensive list of Complexity Classes studied in the area of theoretical computer science known as Computa- tional Complexity. I took on the (mostly painless, thank god for regular expressions) task of translating the Zoo’s HTML code to LATEX for two reasons. First, as a regular Zoo patron, I thought, “what better way to honor such an endeavor than to spruce up the cages a bit and typeset them all in beautiful LATEX.” Second, I thought it would be a perfect project to develop complexity, a LATEX pack- age I’ve created that defines commands to typeset (almost) all of the complexity classes you’ll find here (along with some handy options that allow you to conveniently change the fonts with a single option parameters). To get the package, visit my own home page at http://www.cse.unl.edu/~cbourke/.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Polynomial Hierarchy
    ij 'I '""T', :J[_ ';(" THE POLYNOMIAL HIERARCHY Although the complexity classes we shall study now are in one sense byproducts of our definition of NP, they have a remarkable life of their own. 17.1 OPTIMIZATION PROBLEMS Optimization problems have not been classified in a satisfactory way within the theory of P and NP; it is these problems that motivate the immediate extensions of this theory beyond NP. Let us take the traveling salesman problem as our working example. In the problem TSP we are given the distance matrix of a set of cities; we want to find the shortest tour of the cities. We have studied the complexity of the TSP within the framework of P and NP only indirectly: We defined the decision version TSP (D), and proved it NP-complete (corollary to Theorem 9.7). For the purpose of understanding better the complexity of the traveling salesman problem, we now introduce two more variants. EXACT TSP: Given a distance matrix and an integer B, is the length of the shortest tour equal to B? Also, TSP COST: Given a distance matrix, compute the length of the shortest tour. The four variants can be ordered in "increasing complexity" as follows: TSP (D); EXACTTSP; TSP COST; TSP. Each problem in this progression can be reduced to the next. For the last three problems this is trivial; for the first two one has to notice that the reduction in 411 j ;1 17.1 Optimization Problems 413 I 412 Chapter 17: THE POLYNOMIALHIERARCHY the corollary to Theorem 9.7 proving that TSP (D) is NP-complete can be used with DP.
    [Show full text]
  • NP-Completeness Part II
    NP-Completeness Part II Outline for Today ● Recap from Last Time ● What is NP-completeness again, anyway? ● 3SAT ● A simple, canonical NP-complete problem. ● Independent Sets ● Discovering a new NP-complete problem. ● Gadget-Based Reductions ● A common technique in NP reductions. ● 3-Colorability ● A more elaborate NP-completeness reduction. ● Recent News ● Things happened! What were they? Polynomial-Time Reductions ● If A ≤P B and B ∈ P, then A ∈ P. ● If A ≤P B and B ∈ NP, then A ∈ NP. P NP NP-Hardness ● A language L is called NP-hard if for every A ∈ NP, we have A ≤P L. ● A language in L is called NP-complete if L is NP-hard and L ∈ NP. ● The class NPC is the set of NP-complete problems. NP NP-Hard NPC P The Tantalizing Truth Theorem: If any NP-complete language is in P, then P = NP. Proof: Suppose that L is NP-complete and L ∈ P. Now consider any arbitrary NP problem A. Since L is NP-complete, we know that A ≤p L. Since L ∈ P and A ≤p L, we see that A ∈ P. Since our choice of A was arbitrary, this means that NP ⊆ P, so P = NP. ■ P = NP The Tantalizing Truth Theorem: If any NP-complete language is not in P, then P ≠ NP. Proof: Suppose that L is an NP-complete language not in P. Since L is NP-complete, we know that L ∈ NP. Therefore, we know that L ∈ NP and L ∉ P, so P ≠ NP. ■ NP NPC P How do we even know NP-complete problems exist in the first place? Satisfiability ● A propositional logic formula φ is called satisfiable if there is some assignment to its variables that makes it evaluate to true.
    [Show full text]
  • Polynomial Hierarchy
    CSE200 Lecture Notes – Polynomial Hierarchy Lecture by Russell Impagliazzo Notes by Jiawei Gao February 18, 2016 1 Polynomial Hierarchy Recall from last class that for language L, we defined PL is the class of problems poly-time Turing reducible to L. • NPL is the class of problems with witnesses verifiable in P L. • In other words, these problems can be considered as computed by deterministic or nonde- terministic TMs that can get access to an oracle machine for L. The polynomial hierarchy (or polynomial-time hierarchy) can be defined by a hierarchy of problems that have oracle access to the lower level problems. Definition 1 (Oracle definition of PH). Define classes P Σ1 = NP. P • P Σi For i 1, Σi 1 = NP . • ≥ + Symmetrically, define classes P Π1 = co-NP. • P ΠP For i 1, Π co-NP i . i+1 = • ≥ S P S P The Polynomial Hierarchy (PH) is defined as PH = i Σi = i Πi . 1.1 If P = NP, then PH collapses to P P Theorem 2. If P = NP, then P = Σi i. 8 Proof. By induction on i. P Base case: For i = 1, Σi = NP = P by definition. P P ΣP P Inductive step: Assume P NP and Σ P. Then Σ NP i NP P. = i = i+1 = = = 1 CSE 200 Winter 2016 P ΣP Figure 1: An overview of classes in PH. The arrows denote inclusion. Here ∆ P i . (Image i+1 = source: Wikipedia.) Similarly, if any two different levels in PH turn out to be the equal, then PH collapses to the lower of the two levels.
    [Show full text]
  • The Polynomial Hierarchy and Alternations
    Chapter 5 The Polynomial Hierarchy and Alternations “..synthesizing circuits is exceedingly difficulty. It is even more difficult to show that a circuit found in this way is the most economical one to realize a function. The difficulty springs from the large number of essentially different networks available.” Claude Shannon 1949 This chapter discusses the polynomial hierarchy, a generalization of P, NP and coNP that tends to crop up in many complexity theoretic inves- tigations (including several chapters of this book). We will provide three equivalent definitions for the polynomial hierarchy, using quantified pred- icates, alternating Turing machines, and oracle TMs (a fourth definition, using uniform families of circuits, will be given in Chapter 6). We also use the hierarchy to show that solving the SAT problem requires either linear space or super-linear time. p p 5.1 The classes Σ2 and Π2 To understand the need for going beyond nondeterminism, let’s recall an NP problem, INDSET, for which we do have a short certificate of membership: INDSET = {hG, ki : graph G has an independent set of size ≥ k} . Consider a slight modification to the above problem, namely, determin- ing the largest independent set in a graph (phrased as a decision problem): EXACT INDSET = {hG, ki : the largest independent set in G has size exactly k} . Web draft 2006-09-28 18:09 95 Complexity Theory: A Modern Approach. c 2006 Sanjeev Arora and Boaz Barak. DRAFTReferences and attributions are still incomplete. P P 96 5.1. THE CLASSES Σ2 AND Π2 Now there seems to be no short certificate for membership: hG, ki ∈ EXACT INDSET iff there exists an independent set of size k in G and every other independent set has size at most k.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Complexity Classes
    App endix A Glossary of Complexity Classes Summary This glossary includes selfcontained denitions of most complexity classes mentioned in the b o ok Needless to say the glossary oers a very minimal discussion of these classes and the reader is re ferred to the main text for further discussion The items are organized by topics rather than by alphab etic order Sp ecically the glossary is partitioned into two parts dealing separately with complexity classes that are dened in terms of algorithms and their resources ie time and space complexity of Turing machines and complexity classes de ned in terms of nonuniform circuits and referring to their size and depth The algorithmic classes include timecomplexity based classes such as P NP coNP BPP RP coRP PH E EXP and NEXP and the space complexity classes L NL RL and P S P AC E The non k uniform classes include the circuit classes P p oly as well as NC and k AC Denitions and basic results regarding many other complexity classes are available at the constantly evolving Complexity Zoo A Preliminaries Complexity classes are sets of computational problems where each class contains problems that can b e solved with sp ecic computational resources To dene a complexity class one sp ecies a mo del of computation a complexity measure like time or space which is always measured as a function of the input length and a b ound on the complexity of problems in the class We follow the tradition of fo cusing on decision problems but refer to these problems using the terminology of promise problems
    [Show full text]