DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2001.04383V2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2001.04383V2 MIP∗ = RE Zhengfeng Ji∗1, Anand Natarajan†2,3, Thomas Vidick‡3, John Wright§2,3,4, and Henry Yuen¶5 1Centre for Quantum Software and Information, University of Technology Sydney 2Institute for Quantum Information and Matter, California Institute of Technology 3Department of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, California Institute of Technology 4Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Austin 5Department of Computer Science and Department of Mathematics, University of Toronto September 30, 2020 Abstract We show that the class MIP∗ of languages that can be decided by a classical verifier interacting with multiple all-powerful quantum provers sharing entanglement is equal to the class RE of recursively enumerable languages. Our proof builds upon the quantum low-degree test of (Natarajan and Vidick, FOCS 2018) and the classical low-individual degree test of (Ji, et al., 2020) by integrating recent devel- opments from (Natarajan and Wright, FOCS 2019) and combining them with the recursive compression framework of (Fitzsimons et al., STOC 2019). An immediate byproduct of our result is that there is an efficient reduction from the Halting Problem 1 to the problem of deciding whether a two-player nonlocal game has entangled value 1 or at most 2 . Using a known connection, undecidabilityof the entangled value implies a negative answer to Tsirelson’s problem: we show, by providing an explicit example, that the closure Cqa of the set of quantum tensor product correlations is strictly included in the set Cqc of quantum commuting correlations. Following work of (Fritz, Rev. Math. Phys. 2012) and (Junge et al., J. Math. Phys. 2011) our results provide a refutation of Connes’ embedding conjecture from the theory of von Neumann algebras. arXiv:2001.04383v2 [quant-ph] 29 Sep 2020 ∗Email: [email protected] †Email: [email protected] ‡Email: [email protected] §Email: [email protected] ¶Email: [email protected] 1 Contents 1 Introduction 5 1.1 Interactive proof systems . ........... 6 1.2 Statementofresult ............................... ........ 10 1.3 Consequences.................................... ...... 12 1.4 Openquestions ................................... ...... 14 2 Proof Overview 17 3 Preliminaries 24 3.1 Turingmachines .................................. ...... 24 3.2 Linearspaces .................................... ...... 25 3.3 Finitefields ..................................... ...... 27 3.3.1 Subfieldsandbases.............................. ..... 27 3.3.2 Bit string representations . .......... 30 3.4 Polynomials and the low-degree code . ............ 32 3.5 Linear spaces and registers . ........... 33 3.6 Measurements and observables . ........... 34 3.7 Generalized Pauli observables . ............ 34 4 Conditionally Linear Functions, Distributions, and Samplers 38 4.1 Conditionally linear functions and distributions . .................... 38 4.2 Conditionally linear samplers . ............. 43 5 Nonlocal Games 46 5.1 Gamesandstrategies .............................. ........ 46 5.2 Distancemeasures ................................ ....... 48 5.3 Normalformverifiers.... ...... ..... ...... ...... ... ........ 51 6 Types 53 6.1 Typed samplers, deciders, and verifiers . ............... 53 6.2 Graphdistributions .............................. ......... 55 6.3 Detyping typed verifiers . ......... 57 7 Classical and Quantum Low-degree Tests 60 7.1 The classical low-degree test . ............ 60 7.1.1 Thegame....................................... 60 7.1.2 Complexity of the classical low-degree test. ............... 64 7.2 TheMagicSquaregame .............................. ...... 65 7.3 ThePaulibasistest ............................... ........ 69 7.3.1 Thegame....................................... 69 7.3.2 Canonical parameters and complexity of the Pauli basistest ............. 77 2 8 Introspection Games 80 8.1 Overview ........................................ .... 80 8.2 The introspective verifier . ........... 81 8.2.1 Complexity of the introspective verifier . ............. 86 8.2.2 Introspection theorem . ....... 87 8.3 Completeness of the introspective verifier . ................ 88 8.3.1 Preliminarylemmas ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... ..... 88 8.3.2 Completeness of the introspective verifier . .............. 90 8.4 Soundness of the introspective verifier . ............... 92 8.4.1 ThePaulitwirl ................................. .... 92 8.4.2 Preliminarylemmas ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... ..... 98 8.4.3 Soundnessproof ................................ .... 100 9 Oracularization 109 9.1 Overview ........................................ .... 109 9.2 Oracularizing normal form verifiers . ............. 109 9.3 Completeness and complexity of the oracularized verifier................... 110 9.4 Soundness of the oracularized verifier . .............. 112 10 Answer Reduction 114 10.1 Circuit preliminaries . ........... 115 10.2 A Cook-Levin theorem for bounded deciders . .............. 115 10.3 A succinct 5SAT description for deciders . ............... 123 10.4 A PCP for normal form deciders . .......... 128 10.4.1 Preliminaries ................................ ...... 128 10.4.2 ThePCP ....................................... 129 10.5 A normal form verifier for the PCP . ........... 134 10.5.1 Parameters and notation . ........ 134 10.5.2 The answer-reduced verifier . ......... 134 10.5.3 Main theorem for answer reduction . .......... 136 10.6 Completeness of the answer-reduced verifier . ................. 138 10.7 Soundness of the answer-reduced verifier . ............... 140 11 Parallel Repetition 148 11.1 The anchoring transformation . ............. 148 11.2 Parallel repetition of anchored games . ................ 149 12 Gap-preserving Compression 152 12.1 Proof of Theorem 12.1 ..................................... 152 12.2 An MIP∗ protocol for the Halting problem . .... 158 12.3 An explicit separation . ........... 162 A Analysis of the Pauli basis test 164 A.1 Preliminaries ................................... ....... 164 A.2 Strategies ...................................... ...... 166 A.3 Expanding the Hilbert space and defining commuting observables .............. 170 3 A.4 Combining the X and Z measurements............................. 174 A.5 Applying the classical low-degree test . ............... 181 A.6 Pulling the X and Z measurementsapart. 189 4 1 Introduction 2 2 For integer n, k 2 define the quantum (spatial) correlation set C (n, k) as the subset of Rn k that ≥ qs contains all tuples (pabxy) representing families of bipartite distributions that can be locally generated in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Formally, (p ) C (n, k) if and only if there exist separable abxy ∈ qs Hilbert spaces A and B, for every x 1,..., n (resp. y 1,..., n ), a collection of projec- x H H y ∈ { } ∈ { } tions Aa a 1,...,k on A (resp. Bb b 1,...,k on B) that sum to identity, and a state (unit vector) { } ∈{ } H { } ∈{ } H ψ A B such that ∈H ⊗H x y x, y 1,2,..., n , a, b 1,2,..., k , p = ψ∗ A B ψ . (1) ∀ ∈ { } ∀ ∈ { } abxy a ⊗ b Note that due to the normalization conditions on ψ and on Ax and By , for each x, y, (p ) is a { a } { b } abxy probability distribution on 1,2,..., k 2. By taking direct sums it is easy to see that the set C (n, k) is { } qs convex. Let C (n, k) denote its closure (it is known that C (n, k) = C (n, k), see [Slo19a]). qa qs 6 qa Our main result is that the family of sets Cqa(n, k) n,k N is extraordinarily complex, in the following { } ∈ computational sense. For any 0 < ε < 1 define the ε-weak membership problem for Cqa as the problem of 2 2 deciding, given n, k N and a point p = (p ) Rn k , whether p lies in C (n, k) or is ε-far from ∈ abxy ∈ qa it in ℓ1 distance, promised that one is the case. Then we show that for any given 0 < ε < 1 the ε-weak membership problem for Cqa cannot be solved by a Turing machine that halts with the correct answer on every input. We show this by directly reducing the Halting problem to the weak membership problem for Cqa: we show that for all 0 < ε < 1 and any Turing machine one can efficiently compute integers n, k N and a linear functional ℓ on Rn2k2 such that, whenever M halts it holds that ∈ M M sup ℓ (p) = 1, (2) M p Cqa(n,k) ∈ whereas if does not halt then M sup ℓ (p) 1 ε . (3) M ≤ − p Cqa(n,k) ∈ By standard results in convex optimization, this implies the aforementioned claim on the undecidability of the ε-weak membership problem for Cqa (for any 0 < ε < 1). Our result has interesting consequences for long-standing conjectures in quantum information theory and the theory of von Neumann algebras. Through a connection that follows from the work of Navascues, Piro- nio, and Acin [NPA08] the undecidability result implies a negative answer to Tsirelson’s problem [Tsi06]. Let Cqc(n, k) denote the set of quantum commuting correlations, which is the set of tuples (pabxy) arising from operators Ax and By acting on a single Hilbert space and a state ψ such that { a } { b } H ∈H x y x y x, y 1,..., n , a, b 1,..., k , p = ψ∗ A B ψ and A , B = 0. (4) ∀ ∈ { } ∀ ∈ { } abxy a b a b Then Tsirelson’s problem asks if, for all n, k, the sets Cqa(n, k)and Cqc(n, k) are equal. Using results 2 2 from [NPA08] we give integer n, k and an explicit linear function ℓ on Rn k such that 1 sup ℓ(p) = 1, but sup ℓ(p) , ≤ 2 p Cqc(n,k) p Cqa(n,k) ∈ ∈ which implies that C (n, k) = C (n, k). By an implication of Fritz [Fri12] and Junge et al. [JNP+11] qa 6 qc we further obtain that Connes’ Embedding Conjecture [Con76] is false; in other words, there exist type II1 5 von Neumann factors that do not embed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transition Management Explained
    Transition Management Explained INVESTED. TOGETHER.™ Contents 1. Introduction page 3 2. What is transition management? page 4 The transition manager 3. Is using a transition manager right for you? page 5 What are the potential benefits of working with a transition manager? Other potential benefits What are the drawbacks for working with a transition manager? Should we employ a transition manager for every transition event? Can our in-house team manage the transition? Should our outgoing manager transition the assets? Can our incoming manager do the job for us? Should we allow our investment consultant to manage transitions? Should we use a transition manager when funding from or into cash (i.e., for “one-sided events”)? 4. Transition costs page 10 Explicit costs Implicit costs 5. Transition risks page 12 Financial risks Operational risks 6. Minimizing costs and risks page 13 Minimizing explicit costs Minimizing spread and market impact Managing opportunity cost Minimizing operational risks 7. The life cycle of a transition page 17 Stage 1 – Pre-execution (planning) Stage 2 – Execution Stage 3 – Post-execution (reporting) 8. Choosing the right transition manager for you page 19 Don’t focus on brokerage commission alone Guidelines for choosing a transition manager 9. Glossary page 23 Russell Investments // Transition Management Explained 1 Introduction Interest in transition management (TM) has been rising in recent times, thanks to two driving factors. First, in a tough market environment where every basis point counts, TM can represent a significant source of cost savings and can positively contribute to total portfolio returns. Second, recent news coverage on lack of transparency and the departure of some providers from the marketplace has turned the investment spotlight back on this industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Markit Credit Default Swap Calculator User Guide
    Markit Credit Default Swap Calculator User Guide November 2010 Markit Credit Default Swap Calculator User Guide Strictly private and confidential Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Instruments Covered .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Functionality Overview ............................................................................................................................................... 3 CDS Reference Entity and Contract Terms ............................................................................................................... 3 Credit Curve ............................................................................................................................................................... 3 Calculation Results and Details .................................................................................................................................. 3 Yield Curve ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Accessing the Calculator ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Quick Start ....................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Asset-Liability Management: Theory, Practice, Implementation, and the Role of Judgment John R
    REPORT Asset-Liability Management: Theory, Practice, Implementation, and the Role of Judgment John R. Brick, Brick & Associates, Inc. Foreword by Harold M. Sollenberger, Professor Emeritus, Michigan State University Acknowledgments Most research involves the collective efforts of numerous individuals who should be rec- ognized. This report is no exception. First, Ben Rogers of the Filene Research Institute was instrumental in encouraging me to weave the various components of a complex topic— asset-liability management—together into a single readable and reasonably comprehen- sive source. Ben’s goal was to meet what he correctly perceived as a pressing educational need in light of new regulations, one of which requires a certain level of financial knowledge for directors. To lay the groundwork for this research, the staff at Brick & Associates, Inc., conducted numerous risk assessments and analyses of the savings and loan (S&L) industry as it existed in the late 1970s, just prior to its col- lapse due to rising interest rates in the early 1980s. This analytical work was followed up continually with helpful comments, sugges- tions, and criticism of the many drafts and earlier research underlying the report. I am most grateful to Krista Heyer, Kerry Brick Zsigo, Bridget Balesky, and Jeff Brick for their insight and significant contribution to the literature on interest rate risk management. Finally, the comments and suggestions of the Filene reviewers and editors took the report to yet another level, for which I am also grateful. Filene thanks its generous supporters for making this important research possible. ASSET-LIABILITY MANAGEMENT: THEORY, PRACTICE, IMPLEMENTATION AND THE ROLE OF JUDGMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS (Rev.
    [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]
  • Complexity Theory
    Complexity Theory Course Notes Sebastiaan A. Terwijn Radboud University Nijmegen Department of Mathematics P.O. Box 9010 6500 GL Nijmegen the Netherlands [email protected] Copyright c 2010 by Sebastiaan A. Terwijn Version: December 2017 ii Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Complexity theory . .1 1.2 Preliminaries . .1 1.3 Turing machines . .2 1.4 Big O and small o .........................3 1.5 Logic . .3 1.6 Number theory . .4 1.7 Exercises . .5 2 Basics 6 2.1 Time and space bounds . .6 2.2 Inclusions between classes . .7 2.3 Hierarchy theorems . .8 2.4 Central complexity classes . 10 2.5 Problems from logic, algebra, and graph theory . 11 2.6 The Immerman-Szelepcs´enyi Theorem . 12 2.7 Exercises . 14 3 Reductions and completeness 16 3.1 Many-one reductions . 16 3.2 NP-complete problems . 18 3.3 More decision problems from logic . 19 3.4 Completeness of Hamilton path and TSP . 22 3.5 Exercises . 24 4 Relativized computation and the polynomial hierarchy 27 4.1 Relativized computation . 27 4.2 The Polynomial Hierarchy . 28 4.3 Relativization . 31 4.4 Exercises . 32 iii 5 Diagonalization 34 5.1 The Halting Problem . 34 5.2 Intermediate sets . 34 5.3 Oracle separations . 36 5.4 Many-one versus Turing reductions . 38 5.5 Sparse sets . 38 5.6 The Gap Theorem . 40 5.7 The Speed-Up Theorem . 41 5.8 Exercises . 43 6 Randomized computation 45 6.1 Probabilistic classes . 45 6.2 More about BPP . 48 6.3 The classes RP and ZPP .
    [Show full text]
  • Further Evidence on Treasury Bill Market Segmentation In
    Journal of Banking and Finance 18 (1994) 139-151. North-Holland Further evidence on segmentation in the treasury bill market David P. Simon* Diuision of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC, USA Received April 1991, final version received September 1992 This paper shows that differences in supplies of 13- and 12-week Treasury bills have statistically significant and economically meaningful effects on their yield differentials from January 1985 through October 1991, controlling for the general slope of the Treasury bill yield curve, the tendency of bills maturing at month-ends to have lower yields and the tendency of bills whose supply is augmented by cash management bills to have higher yields. The finding that market participants do not arbitrage away yield differentials that owe to differences in supplies indicates that demand curves for individual bills are downward sloping and that segmentation in the Treasury bill market is more pervasive than previously documented. Key words: Treasury bills; Market segmentation .lEL classification: G12; Cl4 The Treasury bill market often is viewed as the most liquid and efficient money market. If the Treasury bill market is efficient because bills are perfect substitutes to marginal investors on a risk-adjusted basis, yield spreads between bills should reflect only expectations about future bill yields and perhaps a risk premium, but not relative bill supplies or strong demands for particular bills. To date, evidence of segmentation in the Treasury bill market has been found in two contexts: Park and Reinganum (1986) show that bills maturing during the last week of calendar months have lower yields than adjacent maturity bills, which Ogden (1987) demonstrates stems from an increased demand owing to a concentration of payments flows at month- ends; and Simon (1991) demonstrates that Treasury cash management bill announcements, which represent unexpected announcements of additional Correspondence to: D.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus Computability Theory
    Syllabus Computability Theory Sebastiaan A. Terwijn Institute for Discrete Mathematics and Geometry Technical University of Vienna Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8–10/E104 A-1040 Vienna, Austria [email protected] Copyright c 2004 by Sebastiaan A. Terwijn version: 2020 Cover picture and above close-up: Sunflower drawing by Alan Turing, c copyright by University of Southampton and King’s College Cambridge 2002, 2003. iii Emil Post (1897–1954) Alonzo Church (1903–1995) Kurt G¨odel (1906–1978) Stephen Cole Kleene Alan Turing (1912–1954) (1909–1994) Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Preliminaries ................................ 2 2 Basic concepts 3 2.1 Algorithms ................................. 3 2.2 Recursion .................................. 4 2.2.1 Theprimitiverecursivefunctions . 4 2.2.2 Therecursivefunctions . 5 2.3 Turingmachines .............................. 6 2.4 Arithmetization............................... 10 2.4.1 Codingfunctions .......................... 10 2.4.2 Thenormalformtheorem . 11 2.4.3 The basic equivalence and Church’s thesis . 13 2.4.4 Canonicalcodingoffinitesets. 15 2.5 Exercises .................................. 15 3 Computable and computably enumerable sets 19 3.1 Diagonalization............................... 19 3.2 Computablyenumerablesets . 19 3.3 Undecidablesets .............................. 22 3.4 Uniformity ................................. 24 3.5 Many-onereducibility ........................... 25 3.6 Simplesets ................................. 26 3.7 Therecursiontheorem ........................... 28 3.8 Exercises
    [Show full text]
  • Fidelity Brokerage and Commission Fee Schedule | Trading Information
    based on the venue that a trade has been routed to for execution and will Brokerage Commission be disclosed upon written request to FBS. Please refer to Fidelity’s customer agreement for additional information about order flow practices and to Fidelity’s commitment to execution quality (http://personal.fidelity.com/products/trading/ and Fee Schedule Fidelity_Services/Service_Commitment.shtml) for additional information about order routing. Also review FBS’s annual disclosure on payment for order flow policies and order routing policies. FEES AND COMPENSATION FBS has entered into a long-term, exclusive and significant arrangement with the advisor to the iShares Funds that includes but is not limited to FBS’s promotion of iShares funds, as well as in some cases purchase of certain iShares funds at a Fidelity brokerage accounts are highly flexible, and our cost reduced commission rate (“Marketing Program”). FBS receives compensation structure is flexible as well. Our use of “à la carte” pricing for from the fund’s advisor or its affiliates in connection with the Marketing Program. many features helps to ensure that you only pay for the FBS is entitled to receive additional payments during or after termination of features you use. the Marketing Program based upon a number of criteria, including the overall success of the Marketing Program. The Marketing Program creates significant incentives for FBS to encourage customers to buy iShares funds. Additional About Our Commissions and Fees information about the sources, amounts, and terms of compensation is The most economical way to place trades is online, meaning described in the ETF’s prospectus and related documents.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic and Complexity
    o| f\ Richard Lassaigne and Michel de Rougemont Logic and Complexity Springer Contents Introduction Part 1. Basic model theory and computability 3 Chapter 1. Prepositional logic 5 1.1. Propositional language 5 1.1.1. Construction of formulas 5 1.1.2. Proof by induction 7 1.1.3. Decomposition of a formula 7 1.2. Semantics 9 1.2.1. Tautologies. Equivalent formulas 10 1.2.2. Logical consequence 11 1.2.3. Value of a formula and substitution 11 1.2.4. Complete systems of connectives 15 1.3. Normal forms 15 1.3.1. Disjunctive and conjunctive normal forms 15 1.3.2. Functions associated to formulas 16 1.3.3. Transformation methods 17 1.3.4. Clausal form 19 1.3.5. OBDD: Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams 20 1.4. Exercises 23 Chapter 2. Deduction systems 25 2.1. Examples of tableaux 25 2.2. Tableaux method 27 2.2.1. Trees 28 2.2.2. Construction of tableaux 29 2.2.3. Development and closure 30 2.3. Completeness theorem 31 2.3.1. Provable formulas 31 2.3.2. Soundness 31 2.3.3. Completeness 32 2.4. Natural deduction 33 2.5. Compactness theorem 36 2.6. Exercices 38 vi CONTENTS Chapter 3. First-order logic 41 3.1. First-order languages 41 3.1.1. Construction of terms 42 3.1.2. Construction of formulas 43 3.1.3. Free and bound variables 44 3.2. Semantics 45 3.2.1. Structures and languages 45 3.2.2. Structures and satisfaction of formulas 46 3.2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Weakness of Sharply Bounded Polynomial Induction
    On the Weakness of Sharply Bounded Polynomial Induction Jan Johannsen Friedrich-Alexander-Universit¨at Erlangen-N¨urnberg May 4, 1994 Abstract 0 We shall show that if the theory S2 of sharply bounded polynomial induction is extended 0 by symbols for certain functions and their defining axioms, it is still far weaker than T2 , which has ordinary sharply bounded induction. Furthermore, we show that this extended 0 b 0 system S2+ cannot Σ1-define every function in AC , the class of functions computable by polynomial size constant depth circuits. 1 Introduction i i The theory S2 of bounded arithmetic and its fragments S2 and T2 (i ≥ 0) were defined in [Bu]. The language of these theories comprises the usual language of arithmetic plus additional 1 |x|·|y| symbols for the functions ⌊ 2 x⌋, |x| := ⌈log2(x + 1)⌉ and x#y := 2 . Quantifiers of the form ∀x≤t , ∃x≤t are called bounded quantifiers. If the bounding term t is furthermore of the form b b |s|, the quantifier is called sharply bounded. The classes Σi and Πi of the bounded arithmetic hierarchy are defined in analogy to the classes of the usual arithmetical hierarchy, where the i counts alternations of bounded quantifiers, ignoring the sharply bounded quantifiers. i S2 is axiomatized by a finite set of open axioms (called BASIC) plus the schema of poly- b nomial induction (PIND) for Σi -formulae ϕ: 1 ϕ(0) ∧ ∀x ( ϕ(⌊ x⌋) → ϕ(x) ) → ∀x ϕ(x) 2 i b T2 is the same with the ordinary induction scheme for Σi -formulae replacing PIND.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Computability Theory
    AN INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTABILITY THEORY CINDY CHUNG Abstract. This paper will give an introduction to the fundamentals of com- putability theory. Based on Robert Soare's textbook, The Art of Turing Computability: Theory and Applications, we examine concepts including the Halting problem, properties of Turing jumps and degrees, and Post's Theo- rem.1 In the paper, we will assume the reader has a conceptual understanding of computer programs. Contents 1. Basic Computability 1 2. The Halting Problem 2 3. Post's Theorem: Jumps and Quantifiers 3 3.1. Arithmetical Hierarchy 3 3.2. Degrees and Jumps 4 3.3. The Zero-Jump, 00 5 3.4. Post's Theorem 5 Acknowledgments 8 References 8 1. Basic Computability Definition 1.1. An algorithm is a procedure capable of being carried out by a computer program. It accepts various forms of numerical inputs including numbers and finite strings of numbers. Computability theory is a branch of mathematical logic that focuses on algo- rithms, formally known in this area as computable functions, and studies the degree, or level of computability that can be attributed to various sets (these concepts will be formally defined and elaborated upon below). This field was founded in the 1930s by many mathematicians including the logicians: Alan Turing, Stephen Kleene, Alonzo Church, and Emil Post. Turing first pioneered computability theory when he introduced the fundamental concept of the a-machine which is now known as the Turing machine (this concept will be intuitively defined below) in his 1936 pa- per, On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem[7].
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Coronavirus Ride Continues for Investors
    Weekly Investment Commentary 9 March 2020 Wild coronavirus ride continues for investors 6WRFNVKDGDYHU\YRODWLOHZHHNEXWPRVWDYHUDJHV¿QLVKHGKLJKHUZLWKWKH S&P 500 up 0.6%. 1 Despite the volatile week, markets were supported by oversold conditions, Joe Biden’s Super Tuesday performance and better coronavirus news from China. The spread of coronavirus outside of China is still the bigger issue, with South Korea, Italy and Iran areas of concern. There are more cases in the U. S., with more expected. It’s important to note that stocks reached an all-time high just two weeks ago. Stocks started the year overbought and overvalued. Fundamentals, while improving, were mixed and a pullback made sense, but its speed and pace were a surprise. HIGHLIGHTS • Coronavirus fears made for a volatile week, but most indexes ended higher. Robert C. Doll, CFA • The Fed’s emergency 50-basis-point cut underscores Senior Portfolio Manager central banks’ commitment to supporting easy and Chief Equity Strategist ¿QDQFLDOFRQGLWLRQV Bob Doll serves as a leading • We believe we are in a bottoming process, but markets member of the equities investing may need more time to get there. team for Nuveen, providing reasoned analysis through equity portfolio management and ongoing market commentary. NOT FDIC INSURED | NO BANK GUARANTEE | MAY LOSE VALUE 10 themes to consider amid volatility We are concerned about coronavirus, but are more concerned about the fear and 1. A growing body of evidence showed an precautions being taken in advance of it, which improving global economy coming into could cause its own economic recession. 2020. Central banks cut rates 100 times last year; U.S.
    [Show full text]