DOCSLIB.ORG

Program Self-Study Report Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Program Self-Study Report Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering University of Washington May 31, 2007 Program Self-Study Report Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION................................................................................................ 4 1 Degree Titles................................................................................................................................ 4 2 Program Modes.......................................................................................................................... 4 3 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings............................................................................ 5 4 Contact Information.................................................................................................................. 6 5 CSE Department Web Sites...................................................................................................... 7 B. ACCREDITATION SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 8 1 Students ....................................................................................................................................... 8 2 Program Educational Objectives ......................................................................................... 15 3 Program Outcomes and Assessment................................................................................... 24 4 Professional Component ........................................................................................................ 53 5 Faculty........................................................................................................................................ 60 6 Facilities...................................................................................................................................... 63 7 Institutional Support ................................................................................................................. 65 8 Computer Engineering Program Criteria ............................................................................ 65 APPENDIX I .......................................................................................................................................... 67 A. TABULAR DATA FOR PROGRAM............................................................................................ 67 Table I-1. Basic-Level Curriculum - Computer Engineering .................................................... 68 Table I-2. Course and Section Size Summary............................................................................. 70 Table I-3. Faculty Workload Summary......................................................................................... 71 Table I-4. Faculty Analysis.............................................................................................................. 71 Table I-5. Support Expenditures..................................................................................................... 71 B. COURSE SYLLABI ............................................................................................................................ 71 B.1 Required Core Courses .......................................................................................................... 71 Page 2 of 239 B.2 Specified Courses in Hardware and Software Tracks........................................................ 71 B.3 Hardware and Software Capstone Courses........................................................................ 71 B.4 Other CSE Majors Courses....................................................................................................... 71 C. FACULTY CURRICULUM VITAE.....................................................................................................71 D. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL......................................................................................................... 71 Page 3 of 239 A. Background Information 1 Degree Titles The Department of Computer Science and Engineering offers a Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering degree through the College of Engineering. The program has two specializations, namely, hardware and software, which were instituted in the fall of 1999. The Department also offers a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science degree through the College of Arts & Sciences. Although our students are differentiated by the degree program they choose, they are otherwise treated very similarly with respect to admission and advising, and in the classroom. We find that the mingling of computer science and computer engineering students in our classes has been very beneficial to both programs. Our computer engineering students end up with a very strong background in computer science, and our computer science students are exposed to engineering practice and skills. 2 Program Modes Almost all undergraduate students in the department are enrolled full-time on-campus, although some students do attend part-time. Courses are offered during day-time hours all four quarters of the academic year (with a minimal summer quarter). Students must meet a satisfactory progress criterion that requires them to complete three courses towards graduation every quarter they are registered (except summer). Exceptions are granted for cooperative work experiences and extenuating circumstances like medical leaves, and for students nearing graduation with minimal outstanding courses to complete. Most students enter our program in their sophomore year or even the start of their junior year. This is the case for historical reasons to guarantee articulation of transfer students from the state’s Community Colleges and to ensure students successfully complete prerequisites prior to matriculation in the department. However, it has the negative effect of pushing all the requirements for our program into approximately 6-8 quarters rather than the 12 for which students are typically enrolled at the University. In 1999, we started admitting incoming freshmen directly to our major. This was a new program initiated by our department to attract strong in-state students who may choose to go elsewhere due to the uncertainty of admission to the major. Now, both in-state and out-of-state students are eligible to be admitted through direct admission. Having students admitted early also means they can distribute their major requirements through their four years on campus, have more even workloads and possibly more time to engage in research. This has become a University-wide program and we (as well as many other departments) are now admitting 20-25% of our majors directly from high school. Page 4 of 239 3 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings The previous ABET review found a very strong program, with no weaknesses or deficiencies. However, four concerns were listed. Criterion 2 – The department should be better at exchanging information about the program objectives and soliciting of suggestions for improvement from constituencies. We responded to this concern by initiating a discussion of the program objectives to establish a new set of objectives that were more in line with the ABET definition. This discussion included our industrial affiliates, faculty and students. At our annual affiliates meeting, we had a special sesson at which we proposed a number of possible objectives, including current objectives to industry representatives. We then held a similar discussion in a faculty meeting. A small committee incorporated the comments and feedback of the affiliates and faculty to formulate a set of program objectives, which were then published on our Website for further comment. We also presented these objectives to students for their comments. This resulted in the final set of objectives presented in this report. We will continue to review the objectives with these constituencies on an annual basis. Criterion 3 – We should strengthen our measurements of the degree of achievement for each particular program outcome and provide better documentation. We have taken several steps to strengthen our assessment efforts and provide better documentation. These are described in detail in Section B.3, but include the following improvements: We have associated each outcome with a set of courses where that outcome can be assessed via directed assignments, exam questions and project assignments, or in-class presentations and discussions. Each course now has a small number of outcomes that are assessed directly by the instructor. Instructors must describe the assessment methodology for each outcome for that class, and include the assignment or exam question if appropriate, along with samples of student work and an assessment of each student in the class of their mastery of that outcome. These assessment materials are then collected and collated in a central place that allows them to be easily reviewed by course coordinators and the program coordinator. As part of this assessment effort, we have provided a set of assessment rubrics for some of the outcomes such as ability to work in teams and ability to communicate. These give instructors a set of specific criteria for judging these outcomes, and provide a more standardized assessment of these outcomes by faculty. We have introduced an end-of-program review that is conducted by the Center for Instructional Development and Research (CIDR) of students in the senior capstone courses. These interviews specifically focus on our objectives and outcomes as they relate to the ABET criteria. These discussions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EMBARGOED for RELEASE MARCH 9, 2011 at 9 A.M. ET, 6 A.M
    acm Association for Computing Machinery Advancing Computing as a Science & Profession EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE MARCH 9, 2011 AT 9 a.m. ET, 6 a.m. PT Contact: Virginia Gold 212-626-0505 [email protected] ACM TURING AWARD GOES TO INNOVATOR IN MACHINE LEARNING Valiant Opened New Frontiers that Transformed Learning Theory, Computational Complexity, and Parallel and Distributed Computing NEW YORK, March 9, 2011 – ACM, the Association for Computing Machinery, today named Leslie G. Valiant of Harvard University the winner of the 2010 ACM A.M. Turing Award http://www.acm.org/news/featured/turing-award-2010 for his fundamental contributions to the development of computational learning theory and to the broader theory of computer science. Valiant brought together machine learning and computational complexity, leading to advances in artificial intelligence as well as computing practices such as natural language processing, handwriting recognition, and computer vision. He also launched several subfields of theoretical computer science, and developed models for parallel computing. The Turing Award, widely considered the “Nobel Prize in Computing", is named for the British mathematician Alan M. Turing. The award carries a $250,000 prize, with financial support provided by Intel Corporation and Google Inc. “Leslie Valiant’s accomplishments over the last 30 years have provided the theoretical basis for progress in artificial intelligence and led to extraordinary achievements in machine learning. His work has produced modeling that offers computationally inspired
    [Show full text]
  • Equad News Fall 2019 Volume 31, Number 1 School of Engineering and Applied Science Princeton, NJ 08544-5263
    EQuad News Fall 2019 Volume 31, Number 1 School of Engineering and Applied Science Princeton, NJ 08544-5263 www.princeton.edu/engineering [email protected] 4 EQuad News DEAN’S Fall 2019 NOTE Volume 31, Number 1 Interim Dean H. Vincent Poor *77 Vice Dean Shaping Cities for People and the Planet Antoine Kahn *78 Associate Dean, As Professor Elie Bou-Zeid eloquently explains on page 14 of this magazine, the Undergraduate Affairs way we build and reshape urban areas over the coming decades will determine a lot Peter Bogucki Associate Dean, about the long-term health of society and this planet. Development Jane Maggard No small task, but Princeton excels at this kind of grand challenge. The future of Associate Dean, Diversity and Inclusion cities is a complex mix of societal, technological, environmental, economic, and Julie Yun ethical questions, and Princeton is well equipped to knit creative, effective solutions. Director of Engineering Communications More generally, the Metropolis Project that Elie introduces is just one example of Steven Schultz the high-impact work and focus on societal benefit at the School of Engineering and Senior Editor Applied Science. We have tremendous momentum and growth in data science, John Sullivan Digital Media Editor bioengineering, and robotics and cyber- Aaron Nathans physical systems, as well as in advancing Writer the overall diversity and inclusion of Molly Sharlach Communications Specialist the school. Scott Lyon Science Communication Associate All this work brings together two distinctive Amelia Herb strengths of Princeton engineers: a culture Contributors Liz Fuller-Wright of fluidly integrating diverse viewpoints Adam Hadhazy and disciplines, and the ability to distill Bennett McIntosh Melissa Moss problems to their core constraints, then Molly Seltzer develop solutions with widespread impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • January 2019 Volume 66 · Issue 01
    ISSN 0002-9920 (print) ISSN 1088-9477 (online) Notices ofof the American MathematicalMathematical Society January 2019 Volume 66, Number 1 The cover art is from the JMM Sampler, page 84. AT THE AMS BOOTH, JMM 2019 ISSN 0002-9920 (print) ISSN 1088-9477 (online) Notices of the American Mathematical Society January 2019 Volume 66, Number 1 © Pomona College © Pomona Talk to Erica about the AMS membership magazine, pick up a free Notices travel mug*, and enjoy a piece of cake. facebook.com/amermathsoc @amermathsoc A WORD FROM... Erica Flapan, Notices Editor in Chief I would like to introduce myself as the new Editor in Chief of the Notices and share my plans with readers. The Notices is an interesting and engaging magazine that is read by mathematicians all over the world. As members of the AMS, we should all be proud to have the Notices as our magazine of record. Personally, I have enjoyed reading the Notices for over 30 years, and I appreciate the opportunity that the AMS has given me to shape the magazine for the next three years. I hope that under my leadership even more people will look forward to reading it each month as much as I do. Above all, I would like the focus of the Notices to be on expository articles about pure and applied mathematics broadly defined. I would like the authors, topics, and writing styles of these articles to be diverse in every sense except for their desire to explain the mathematics that they love in a clear and engaging way.
    [Show full text]
  • 17Th Knuth Prize: Call for Nominations
    17th Knuth Prize: Call for Nominations The Donald E. Knuth Prize for outstanding contributions to the foundations of computer science is awarded for major research accomplishments and contri- butions to the foundations of computer science over an extended period of time. The Prize is awarded annually by the ACM Special Interest Group on Algo- rithms and Computing Theory (SIGACT) and the IEEE Technical Committee on the Mathematical Foundations of Computing (TCMF). Nomination Procedure Anyone in the Theoretical Computer Science com- munity may nominate a candidate. To do so, please send nominations to : [email protected] with a subject line of Knuth Prize nomi- nation by February 15, 2017. The nomination should state the nominee's name, summarize his or her contributions in one or two pages, provide a CV for the nominee or a pointer to the nominees webpage, and give telephone, postal, and email contact information for the nominator. Any supporting letters from other members of the community (up to a limit of 5) should be included in the package that the nominator sends to the Committee chair. Supporting letters should contain substantial information not in the nomination. Others may en- dorse the nomination simply by adding their names to the nomination letter. If you have nominated a candidate in past years, you can re-nominate the candi- date by sending a message to that effect to the above address. (You may revise the nominating materials if you desire). Criteria for Selection The winner will be selected by a Prize Committee consisting of six people appointed by the SIGACT and TCMF Chairs.
    [Show full text]
  • Valiant Receives 2010 Turing Award
    Valiant Receives 2010 Turing Award The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) enumeration problems can be has announced that Leslie G. Valiant of Harvard intractable even when the cor- University is the recipient of the 2010 A. M. Tur- responding decision problem is ing Award “for transformative contributions to tractable. Another fundamental the theory of computation, including the theory contribution to computational of probably approximately correct (PAC) learning, complexity was Valiant’s theory the complexity of enumeration and of algebraic of algebraic computation, in computation, and the theory of parallel and distrib- which he established a frame- uted computing.” The award carries a cash prize work for understanding which of US$250,000 and will be presented to Valiant at algebraic formulas can be evalu- the annual ACM Awards Banquet on June 4, 2011, ated efficiently. In analogy with in San Jose, California. the Boolean complexity classes P and NP, his theory character- Citation izes the difficulty of computing Over the past thirty years, Leslie Valiant has made fundamental functions in linear Leslie G. Valiant fundamental contributions to many aspects of algebra, namely the determinant theoretical computer science. His work has opened and permanent. Together with new frontiers, introduced ingenious new concepts, his work on #P, this set the stage for some of the and presented results of great originality, depth, most exciting subsequent developments in com- putational complexity, such as the development of and beauty. Time and again, Valiant’s work has interactive proofs for problems beyond NP. literally defined or transformed the computer sci- A third broad area in which Valiant has made ence research landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Professor Shang-Hua Teng
    Professor Shang-Hua Teng Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California 1039 25 Street 3710 McClintock, RTH 505, Los Angeles, CA 90089 Santa Monica, CA 90403 (213) 740-3667, [email protected] (617) 440-4281 EMPLOYMENT: University Professor USC (2017 – ) Seeley G. Mudd Professor (Computer Science and Mathematics) USC (2012 – ) Chair and Seeley G. Mudd Professor (Computer Science) USC (2009 – 2012) Professor (Computer Science) Boston University (2002 – 2009) Research Affiliate Professor (Mathematics) MIT (1999 – Present) Visiting Research Scientist Microsoft Research Asia and New England (2004 – Present) Senior Research Scientist Akamai (1997 – 2009) Visiting Professor (Computer Science) Tsinghua University (2004 – 2008) Professor (Computer Science)[Associate Professor before 1999] UIUC (2000 – 2002) Research Scientist IBM Almaden Research Center (1997 – 1999) Assistant Professor (Computer Science) Univ. of Minnesota (1994 – 1997) Research Scientist Intel Corporation (Summer 1994, 1995) Instructor (Mathematics) MIT (1992 – 1994) Computer Scientist NASA Ames Research Center (Summer 1993) Research Scientist Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (1991 – 1992) EDUCATION: Ph.D. (Computer Science) Carnegie Mellon University (1991) Thesis: “A Unified Geometric Approach to Graph Partitioning.” Advisor: Gary Lee Miller M.S. (Computer Science) University of Southern California (1988) Thesis: “Security, Verifiablity, and Universality in Distributed Computing”. Advised by Leonard Adleman and Ming-Deh Huang B.S. (Computer Science) & B.A. (Electrical
    [Show full text]
  • New Faces at CUCS Every Other One and Compute Nearest Neighbor, a Search Their Similarity for Each Pair
    NEWSLETTER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY VOL.12 NO.1 SPRING 2016 straightforward for small data Rather than searching an entire sets: compare every object to data set for the single most New Faces at CUCS every other one and compute nearest neighbor, a search their similarity for each pair. would go much faster if objects But as the number of objects were pre-grouped according to increases into the billions, com- some shared attribute, making it puting time grows quadratically, easy to zero in on just the small he impact of huge data making the task prohibitively subset of objects most likely to sets is hard to understate, contain the most similar neigh- responsible for advancing expensive, at least in terms of T traditional expectations. bor. The new challenge then almost every scientific and becomes: what attribute shall we technological field, from ma- Alexandr Andoni, a theoretical use to make such a pre-grouping chine learning and personalized computer scientist focused on maximally efficient. The speed-up medicine, to speech recognition developing algorithmic founda- thus gained reverberates across and translation. tions for massive data, sees the a wide range of computational The flip side of the data revolu- need to reframe the issue: “The methods since nearest neigh- tion is that massive data has question today is not ‘what can bors search is ubiquitous and ALEXANDR ANDONI rendered many standard algo- we solve in polynomial time?’ serves as a primitive in higher- level algorithms, particularly in ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR rithms computationally expen- but ‘what is possible in time machine learning.
    [Show full text]
  • ACM SIGACT Announces 2017 Awards Gödel, Knuth and Distinguished Service Prizes Recognize Contributions to Algorithms and Compu
    Contact: Michael Mitzenmacher Jim Ormond ACM SIGACT Chair ACM 617-496-7172 212-626-0505 [email protected] [email protected] ACM SIGACT Announces 2017 Awards Gödel, Knuth and Distinguished Service Prizes Recognize Contributions to Algorithms and Computation Theory Community NEW YORK, June 19, 2017 – The Association for Computing Machinery’s Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory (SIGACT) recently announced the recipients of three significant awards. The 2017 Gödel Prize is awarded to Cynthia Dwork, Frank McSherry, Kobbi Nissim and Adam Smith for their work on differential privacy in their paper “Calibrating Noise to Sensitivity in Private Data Analysis.” The 2017 Donald E. Knuth Prize is awarded to Oded Goldreich of the Weizmann Institute of Science for fundamental and lasting contributions to many areas of theoretical computer science, including cryptography, probabilistically checkable proofs, inapproximability, property testing, and several other areas in complexity theory. Also this year, Alistair Sinclair of the University of California, Berkeley is the recipient of the 2017 ACM SIGACT Distinguished Service Prize for his role in the spectacular success of The Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing. These awards will be presented at the 49th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC 2017), to be held June 19-23, in Montreal, Canada. 2017 Gödel Prize Differential privacy is a powerful theoretical model for dealing with the privacy of statistical data. The intellectual impact of differential privacy has been broad, influencing thinking about privacy across many disciplines. The work of Cynthia Dwork (Harvard University), Frank McSherry (independent researcher), Kobbi Nissim (Harvard University), and Adam Smith (Harvard University) launched a new line of theoretical research aimed at understanding the possibilities and limitations of differentially private algorithms.
    [Show full text]
  • SIGACT Viability
    SIGACT Name and Mission: SIGACT: SIGACT Algorithms & Computation Theory The primary mission of ACM SIGACT (Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory) is to foster and promote the discovery and dissemination of high quality research in the domain of theoretical computer science. The field of theoretical computer science is interpreted broadly so as to include algorithms, data structures, complexity theory, distributed computation, parallel computation, VLSI, machine learning, computational biology, computational geometry, information theory, cryptography, quantum computation, computational number theory and algebra, program semantics and verification, automata theory, and the study of randomness. Work in this field is often distinguished by its emphasis on mathematical technique and rigor. Newsletters: Volume Issue Issue Date Number of Pages Actually Mailed 2014 45 01 March 2014 N/A 2013 44 04 December 2013 104 27-Dec-13 44 03 September 2013 96 30-Sep-13 44 02 June 2013 148 13-Jun-13 44 01 March 2013 116 18-Mar-13 2012 43 04 December 2012 140 29-Jan-13 43 03 September 2012 120 06-Sep-12 43 02 June 2012 144 25-Jun-12 43 01 March 2012 100 20-Mar-12 2011 42 04 December 2011 104 29-Dec-11 42 03 September 2011 108 29-Sep-11 42 02 June 2011 104 N/A 42 01 March 2011 140 23-Mar-11 2010 41 04 December 2010 128 15-Dec-10 41 03 September 2010 128 13-Sep-10 41 02 June 2010 92 17-Jun-10 41 01 March 2010 132 17-Mar-10 Membership: based on fiscal year dates 1st Year 2 + Years Total Year Professional
    [Show full text]
  • Federated Computing Research Conference, FCRC’96, Which Is David Wise, Steering Being Held May 20 - 28, 1996 at the Philadelphia Downtown Marriott
    CRA Workshop on Academic Careers Federated for Women in Computing Science 23rd Annual ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Computing Computer Architecture FCRC ‘96 ACM International Conference on Research Supercomputing ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 11th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing 12th Annual ACM Symposium on Computational Geometry First ACM Workshop on Applied Computational Geometry ACM/UMIACS Workshop on Parallel Algorithms ACM SIGPLAN ‘96 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation ACM Workshop of Functional Languages in Introductory Computing Philadelphia Skyline SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming 10th ACM Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Simulation Invited Speakers Wm. A. Wulf ACM SIGMETRICS Symposium on Burton Smith Parallel and Distributed Tools Cynthia Dwork 4th Annual ACM/IEEE Workshop on Robin Milner I/O in Parallel and Distributed Systems Randy Katz SIAM Symposium on Networks and Information Management Sponsors ACM CRA IEEE NSF May 20-28, 1996 SIAM Philadelphia, PA FCRC WELCOME Organizing Committee Mary Jane Irwin, Chair Penn State University Steve Mahaney, Vice Chair Rutgers University Alan Berenbaum, Treasurer AT&T Bell Laboratories Frank Friedman, Exhibits Temple University Sampath Kannan, Student Coordinator Univ. of Pennsylvania Welcome to the second Federated Computing Research Conference, FCRC’96, which is David Wise, Steering being held May 20 - 28, 1996 at the Philadelphia downtown Marriott. This second Indiana University FCRC follows the same model of the highly successful first conference, FCRC’93, in Janice Cuny, Careers which nine constituent conferences participated.
    [Show full text]
  • BEATCS No 119
    ISSN 0252–9742 Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science EATCS E A T C S Number 119 June 2016 Council of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science President:Luca Aceto Iceland Vice Presidents:Paul Spirakis United Kingdom and Greece Antonin Kucera Czech Republic Giuseppe Persiano Italy Treasurer:Dirk Janssens Belgium Bulletin Editor:Kazuo Iwama Kyoto,Japan Lars Arge Denmark Anca Muscholl France Jos Baeten The Netherlands Luke Ong UK Lars Birkedal Denmark Catuscia Palamidessi France Mikolaj Bojanczyk Poland Giuseppe Persiano Italy Fedor Fomin Norway Alberto Policriti Italy Pierre Fraigniaud France Alberto Marchetti Spaccamela Italy Leslie Ann Goldberg UK Vladimiro Sassone UK Magnus Halldorsson Iceland Thomas Schwentick Germany Monika Henzinger Austria Jukka Suomela Finland Christos Kaklamanis Greece Thomas Wilke Germany Elvira Mayordomo Spain Peter Widmayer Switzerland Michael Mitzenmacher USA Gerhard Woeginger¨ The Netherlands Past Presidents: Maurice Nivat (1972–1977)Mike Paterson (1977–1979) Arto Salomaa (1979–1985)Grzegorz Rozenberg (1985–1994) Wilfred Brauer (1994–1997)Josep D´iaz (1997–2002) Mogens Nielsen (2002–2006)Giorgio Ausiello (2006–2009) Burkhard Monien (2009–2012) Secretary Office:Ioannis Chatzigiannakis Italy Efi Chita Greece EATCS Council Members email addresses Luca Aceto ..................................... [email protected] Lars Arge .............................. [email protected] Jos Baeten ............................... [email protected] Lars Birkedal ............................ [email protected] Mikolaj Bojanczyk .......................... [email protected] Fedor Fomin ................................ [email protected] Pierre Fraigniaud .. [email protected] Leslie Ann Goldberg ................ [email protected] Magnus Halldorsson ........................ [email protected] Monika Henzinger ................ [email protected] Kazuo Iwama ........................ [email protected] Dirk Janssens ........................
    [Show full text]
  • Citation: 2012 Knuth Prize
    Citation: 2012 Knuth Prize The 2012 Knuth Prize has been awarded to Leonid Levin, in recognition of four decades of visionary research in complexity, cryptography, and information theory. Professor Levin is best known for his discovery of NP-completeness, the core concept of computational complexity and the best explanation to date of why one expects certain computational problems to be intractable. He made this discovery in the Soviet Union at about the same time as, but independently of, Stephen Cook, the winner of the 1982 Turing Award. His work on the subject did not appear in the West until 1973, by which time the study of NP-completeness was well established, following Cook’s 1971 STOC paper; for a long time, Levin received little official recognition for his conceptual breakthrough. Fortunately, it is now common for computational-complexity textbooks to refer to the “Cook-Levin Theorem.” Later, Levin developed the theory of “average-case NP-completeness,” which has given us the best explanation to date of why some computational problems are intractable not only on rare, contrived instances but “on average,” with respect to input distributions of interest. He also provided a key step, with co-authors László Babai, Lance Fortnow, and Mario Szegedy, in the proof of the celebrated PCP Theorem that relates the complexity of solving certain natural NP- hard search problems approximately to the complexity of solving them exactly. Together, they put forth the notion of “holographic proofs,” i.e., proofs whose correctness can be checked efficiently by a program that samples only a small fraction of the bits.
    [Show full text]