DOCSLIB.ORG

Learning Optimal Quantum Models Is NP-Hard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Learning Optimal Quantum Models Is NP-Hard Learning optimal quantum models is NP-hard The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Stark, Cyril J. et al. "Learning optimal quantum models is NP- hard. " Physical Review A 97, 2 (February 2018): 020103(R) © 2018 American Physical Society As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.020103 Publisher American Physical Society Version Final published version Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/114464 Terms of Use Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. PHYSICAL REVIEW A 97, 020103(R) (2018) Rapid Communications Learning optimal quantum models is NP-hard Cyril J. Stark Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307, USA (Received 19 August 2016; published 8 February 2018) Physical modeling translates measured data into a physical model. Physical modeling is a major objective in physics and is generally regarded as a creative process. How good are computers at solving this task? Here, we show that in the absence of physical heuristics, the inference of optimal quantum models cannot be computed efficiently (unless P = NP). This result illuminates rigorous limits to the extent to which computers can be used to further our understanding of nature. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.97.020103 A characterization of a physical experiment is always at To describe the experiment quantum mechanically we need least twofold. On the one hand, we have a description to translate the descriptions Sx and Oyz into quantum states ρ and measurement operators E . This corresponds to the S = (description of the state) x yz task of modeling. The assignment of matrices to Sx and Oyz of the state of the physical system. For instance, S can contain a must be such that the quantum mechanical predictions are few paragraphs of text with detailed instructions for preparing compatible with the previously measured data fxyz. By Born’s that state experimentally in the laboratory, or for finding it in rule, tr(ρx Eyz) is the probability for measuring outcome z nature. if we measure state Sx with the measurement My . Hence, The second part of the characterization of an experiment is achieving compatibility between the theoretical model ρx ,Eyz the description of the measurement that is performed. As for on the one hand and the experimental description Sx ,Oyz on the state, the measurement may be described in terms of a short the other hand requires searching for states and measurements text, satisfying tr(ρx Eyz) ≈ fxyz for all (x,y,z) ∈ . Here, ⊆ × × M = [X] [Y ] [Z] marks the particular combinations (x,y,z) (description of the measurement). that we have measured experimentally. Combinations in the M may be a complete manual for constructing the measure- complement (x,y,z) ∈ c are unknown. A common pitfall to ment device we use. avoid is overfitting, that is, finding an excessively complicated Both M and S can specify temporal and spatial informa- model that perfectly fits the data but has no predictive power tion, e.g., the desired state is the state resulting from a particular over future observations. To avoid overfitting we need to search initial state after letting it evolve for 1 μs. Every experimental for the lowest-dimensional model satisfying tr(ρx Eyz) ≈ fxyz. paper must provide M and S. In fact, if we placed no restriction on the dimension, then Performing the measurement M results in a measurement we could fit every data set exactly with a finite-dimensional outcome. We denote by Z the number of different measurement quantum model that does not allow for the prediction of future outcomes. Each of the outcomes may again be characterized measurement outcomes. For instance, we could fit the mea- in terms of a few paragraphs of text, sured data with an X-dimensional model where ρx =|xx| and E = X f |xx|. Indeed, tr(ρ E ) = f .Onthe O = yz x=1 xyz x yz xyz z (description of zth measurement outcome), other hand, if a subsystem structure (e.g., two independent for all z ∈ [Z]:={1,...,Z}. Here, we assume without loss of parties Alice and Bob) is imposed, then there are circumstances generality that the description Oz also specifies M, i.e., it both where data sets cannot be modeled by finite-dimensional fully specifies the measurement device and the way it signals quantum models [1,2]. outcome z has been measured to the observer. In the remainder we are going to assume that the em- Oftentimes we do not only consider a single state S and pirical frequencies fxyz are equal to the probabilities pxyz O S a single measurement (O ) ∈ but X states (S ) ∈ and Y for measuring outcome yz given that we prepared x and z z [Z] x x [X] M measurements (O ) (y ∈ [Y ]). For instance, we could be measured y . This condition is met if we can measure states yz z∈[Z] S M interested in measuring the spin of an electron in different x with measurements y an unbounded number of times →∞ directions and at different times. Repeatedly measuring the (Nxy ). We will see that inference is NP-hard even in this noiseless setting where we want to solve state Sx with the measurement My we are able to collect Z empirical frequency distributions (fxyz)z=1 for that particular sequence of measurements, that is, fxyz = {z|xy}/Nxy, where minimize d N denotes the number of times we measure S with M and xy x y ∃ d where {z|xy} denotes the number of times we see outcome such that -dimensional states and measurements Oyz during these runs of the experiment. satisfying pxyz = tr(ρx Eyz) ∀(x,y,z) ∈ . (1) 2469-9926/2018/97(2)/020103(4) 020103-1 ©2018 American Physical Society CYRIL J. STARK PHYSICAL REVIEW A 97, 020103(R) (2018) We call problem (1) MinDim; it describes the task of learning Communication, we prove the latter by reduction from 3col. effective quantum models from experimental data. Our result Thus, we are arriving at our main result, Theorem 1. that MinDim is NP-hard implies that computers are not capable Theorem 1. MinDim is NP-hard. of computing optimal quantum models describing general Every experiment can be described in terms of (Sx )x and experimental observations (unless P = NP). (O)yz. Therefore, problem (1) does not make any assump- NP-hardness is a term from computational complexity tions about the underlying quantum model. Often, however, theory which aims at classifying problems according to their we accept some side information about the physical sys- complexity. The relevant complexity measure depends on the tem we wish to analyze. A common postulate is that we particular application. Here, we focus on time complexity measure a global state with local measurements [4–7]. In which measures the time it takes to solve a problem on this setting we want to solve the following modification of a computer (deterministic Turing machine). A particularly MinDim, important family of problems are decision problems. These are problems whose solution is either yes or no. The 3-coloring minimize d of graphs is a famous example. In 3-coloring (3col) we are such that ∃ a d2-dimensional state ρ and d-dimensional given a graph with vertices specified by a vertex set V and with edges specified by an edge set E. Our task is to decide measurements (Eyz)z and (Fyz)z satisfying whether or not it is possible to assign colors red, green,orblue pyzy z = tr(ρEyz ⊗ Fy z ) ∀(yzy z ) ∈ (2) to vertices v ∈ V in such a way that vertices v,v are colored differently whenever the edge (v,v ) with endpoints v,v is an (for some ⊆ [Y ] × [Z] × [Y ] × [Z ]). We are referring to element of E. In this example, the specification of V and E problem (2) in terms of MinDim(AB); the label (AB) references forms the problem instance and the criterion for the solution yes two parties, usually called Alice and Bob. Here, we prove NP- (i.e., yes, this graph is 3-colorable) is the so-called acceptance hardness of MinDim(AB) by showing that the natural decision condition. A decision problem is specified by an acceptance problem Dim-3(AB) (see the Supplemental Material [8]) of condition and by a set of problem instances. MinDim(AB) is NP-hard. The complexity classes P and NP have been introduced to Theorem 2. MinDim(AB) is NP-hard. classify problems according to their complexity. The complex- Theorems 1 and 2 assume that the measurement probabil- ity class P is the set of all decision problems whose complexity ities pxyz and pyzy z are known exactly. Hence, Theorems 1 is a polynomial in the size of the problem instances (e.g., and 2 do not allow one to draw rigorous conclusions about the number of vertices in case of 3col). The class NP is situations where pxyz are only known approximately. When the set of problems with the following property. Every yes does a physical theory qualify to be a good physical theory? instance admits a proof that can be checked in polynomial Answers provided are sometimes vague. However, there is time. For example, in the case of 3col, we can prove that a a consensus that predictive power is a necessary criterion a graph is 3-colorable by providing an explicit 3-coloring of good physical theory needs to satisfy. This criterion is satisfied that graph; the correctness of that coloring can be verified by if models drawn from that theory (e.g., quantum theory) checking that for all (v,v ) ∈ E, the vertices v and v are colored allow for the prediction of future measurement outcomes, differently.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CS601 DTIME and DSPACE Lecture 5 Time and Space Functions: T, S
    CS601 DTIME and DSPACE Lecture 5 Time and Space functions: t, s : N → N+ Definition 5.1 A set A ⊆ U is in DTIME[t(n)] iff there exists a deterministic, multi-tape TM, M, and a constant c, such that, 1. A = L(M) ≡ w ∈ U M(w)=1 , and 2. ∀w ∈ U, M(w) halts within c · t(|w|) steps. Definition 5.2 A set A ⊆ U is in DSPACE[s(n)] iff there exists a deterministic, multi-tape TM, M, and a constant c, such that, 1. A = L(M), and 2. ∀w ∈ U, M(w) uses at most c · s(|w|) work-tape cells. (Input tape is “read-only” and not counted as space used.) Example: PALINDROMES ∈ DTIME[n], DSPACE[n]. In fact, PALINDROMES ∈ DSPACE[log n]. [Exercise] 1 CS601 F(DTIME) and F(DSPACE) Lecture 5 Definition 5.3 f : U → U is in F (DTIME[t(n)]) iff there exists a deterministic, multi-tape TM, M, and a constant c, such that, 1. f = M(·); 2. ∀w ∈ U, M(w) halts within c · t(|w|) steps; 3. |f(w)|≤|w|O(1), i.e., f is polynomially bounded. Definition 5.4 f : U → U is in F (DSPACE[s(n)]) iff there exists a deterministic, multi-tape TM, M, and a constant c, such that, 1. f = M(·); 2. ∀w ∈ U, M(w) uses at most c · s(|w|) work-tape cells; 3. |f(w)|≤|w|O(1), i.e., f is polynomially bounded. (Input tape is “read-only”; Output tape is “write-only”.
    [Show full text]
  • Interactive Proof Systems and Alternating Time-Space Complexity
    Theoretical Computer Science 113 (1993) 55-73 55 Elsevier Interactive proof systems and alternating time-space complexity Lance Fortnow” and Carsten Lund** Department of Computer Science, Unicersity of Chicago. 1100 E. 58th Street, Chicago, IL 40637, USA Abstract Fortnow, L. and C. Lund, Interactive proof systems and alternating time-space complexity, Theoretical Computer Science 113 (1993) 55-73. We show a rough equivalence between alternating time-space complexity and a public-coin interactive proof system with the verifier having a polynomial-related time-space complexity. Special cases include the following: . All of NC has interactive proofs, with a log-space polynomial-time public-coin verifier vastly improving the best previous lower bound of LOGCFL for this model (Fortnow and Sipser, 1988). All languages in P have interactive proofs with a polynomial-time public-coin verifier using o(log’ n) space. l All exponential-time languages have interactive proof systems with public-coin polynomial-space exponential-time verifiers. To achieve better bounds, we show how to reduce a k-tape alternating Turing machine to a l-tape alternating Turing machine with only a constant factor increase in time and space. 1. Introduction In 1981, Chandra et al. [4] introduced alternating Turing machines, an extension of nondeterministic computation where the Turing machine can make both existential and universal moves. In 1985, Goldwasser et al. [lo] and Babai [l] introduced interactive proof systems, an extension of nondeterministic computation consisting of two players, an infinitely powerful prover and a probabilistic polynomial-time verifier. The prover will try to convince the verifier of the validity of some statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:Quant-Ph/0202111V1 20 Feb 2002
    Quantum statistical zero-knowledge John Watrous Department of Computer Science University of Calgary Calgary, Alberta, Canada [email protected] February 19, 2002 Abstract In this paper we propose a definition for (honest verifier) quantum statistical zero-knowledge interactive proof systems and study the resulting complexity class, which we denote QSZK. We prove several facts regarding this class: The following natural problem is a complete promise problem for QSZK: given instructions • for preparing two mixed quantum states, are the states close together or far apart in the trace norm metric? By instructions for preparing a mixed quantum state we mean the description of a quantum circuit that produces the mixed state on some specified subset of its qubits, assuming all qubits are initially in the 0 state. This problem is a quantum generalization of the complete promise problem of Sahai| i and Vadhan [33] for (classical) statistical zero-knowledge. QSZK is closed under complement. • QSZK PSPACE. (At present it is not known if arbitrary quantum interactive proof • systems⊆ can be simulated in PSPACE, even for one-round proof systems.) Any honest verifier quantum statistical zero-knowledge proof system can be parallelized to • a two-message (i.e., one-round) honest verifier quantum statistical zero-knowledge proof arXiv:quant-ph/0202111v1 20 Feb 2002 system. (For arbitrary quantum interactive proof systems it is known how to parallelize to three messages, but not two.) Moreover, the one-round proof system can be taken to be such that the prover sends only one qubit to the verifier in order to achieve completeness and soundness error exponentially close to 0 and 1/2, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2020 (Provide Proofs for All Answers) (120 Points Total)
    Complexity Qual Spring 2020 (provide proofs for all answers) (120 Points Total) 1 Problem 1: Formal Languages (30 Points Total): For each of the following languages, state and prove whether: (i) the lan- guage is regular, (ii) the language is context-free but not regular, or (iii) the language is non-context-free. n n Problem 1a (10 Points): La = f0 1 jn ≥ 0g (that is, the set of all binary strings consisting of 0's and then 1's where the number of 0's and 1's are equal). ∗ Problem 1b (10 Points): Lb = fw 2 f0; 1g jw has an even number of 0's and at least two 1'sg (that is, the set of all binary strings with an even number, including zero, of 0's and at least two 1's). n 2n 3n Problem 1c (10 Points): Lc = f0 #0 #0 jn ≥ 0g (that is, the set of all strings of the form 0 repeated n times, followed by the # symbol, followed by 0 repeated 2n times, followed by the # symbol, followed by 0 repeated 3n times). Problem 2: NP-Hardness (30 Points Total): There are a set of n people who are the vertices of an undirected graph G. There's an undirected edge between two people if they are enemies. Problem 2a (15 Points): The people must be assigned to the seats around a single large circular table. There are exactly as many seats as people (both n). We would like to make sure that nobody ever sits next to one of their enemies.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Hardness Escalation Results in Computational Complexity Theory Pritish Kamath
    Some Hardness Escalation Results in Computational Complexity Theory by Pritish Kamath B.Tech. Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (2012) S.M. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2015) Submitted to Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology February 2020 ⃝c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2019. All rights reserved. Author: ............................................................. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science September 16, 2019 Certified by: ............................................................. Ronitt Rubinfeld Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, MIT Thesis Supervisor Certified by: ............................................................. Madhu Sudan Gordon McKay Professor of Computer Science, Harvard University Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: ............................................................. Leslie A. Kolodziejski Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, MIT Chair, Department Committee on Graduate Students Some Hardness Escalation Results in Computational Complexity Theory by Pritish Kamath Submitted to Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science on September 16, 2019, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science & Engineering Abstract In this thesis, we prove new hardness escalation results in computational complexity theory; a phenomenon where hardness results against seemingly weak models of computation for any problem can be lifted, in a black box manner, to much stronger models of computation by considering a simple gadget composed version of the original problem. For any unsatisfiable CNF formula F that is hard to refute in the Resolution proof system, we show that a gadget-composed version of F is hard to refute in any proof system whose lines are computed by efficient communication protocols.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Complexity Theory
    Computational Complexity Theory Markus Bl¨aser Universit¨atdes Saarlandes Draft|February 5, 2012 and forever 2 1 Simple lower bounds and gaps Lower bounds The hierarchy theorems of the previous chapter assure that there is, e.g., a language L 2 DTime(n6) that is not in DTime(n3). But this language is not natural.a But, for instance, we do not know how to show that 3SAT 2= DTime(n3). (Even worse, we do not know whether this is true.) The best we can show is that 3SAT cannot be decided by a O(n1:81) time bounded and simultaneously no(1) space bounded deterministic Turing machine. aThis, of course, depends on your interpretation of \natural" . In this chapter, we prove some simple lower bounds. The bounds in this section will be shown for natural problems. Furthermore, these bounds are unconditional. While showing the NP-hardness of some problem can be viewed as a lower bound, this bound relies on the assumption that P 6= NP. However, the bounds in this chapter will be rather weak. 1.1 A logarithmic space bound n n Let LEN = fa b j n 2 Ng. LEN is the language of all words that consists of a sequence of as followed by a sequence of b of equal length. This language is one of the examples for a context-free language that is not regular. We will show that LEN can be decided with logarithmic space and that this amount of space is also necessary. The first part is easy. Exercise 1.1 Prove: LEN 2 DSpace(log).
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Complexity
    Computational complexity Plan Complexity of a computation. Complexity classes DTIME(T (n)). Relations between complexity classes. Complete problems. Domino problems. NP-completeness. Complete problems for other classes Alternating machines. – p.1/17 Complexity of a computation A machine M is T (n) time bounded if for every n and word w of size n, every computation of M has length at most T (n). A machine M is S(n) space bounded if for every n and word w of size n, every computation of M uses at most S(n) cells of the working tape. Fact: If M is time or space bounded then L(M) is recursive. If L is recursive then there is a time and space bounded machine recognizing L. DTIME(T (n)) = fL(M) : M is det. and T (n) time boundedg NTIME(T (n)) = fL(M) : M is T (n) time boundedg DSPACE(S(n)) = fL(M) : M is det. and S(n) space boundedg NSPACE(S(n)) = fL(M) : M is S(n) space boundedg . – p.2/17 Hierarchy theorems A function S(n) is space constructible iff there is S(n)-bounded machine that given w writes aS(jwj) on the tape and stops. A function T (n) is time constructible iff there is a machine that on a word of size n makes exactly T (n) steps. Thm: Let S2(n) be a space-constructible function and let S1(n) ≥ log(n). If S1(n) lim infn!1 = 0 S2(n) then DSPACE(S2(n)) − DSPACE(S1(n)) is nonempty. Thm: Let T2(n) be a time-constructible function and let T1(n) log(T1(n)) lim infn!1 = 0 T2(n) then DTIME(T2(n)) − DTIME(T1(n)) is nonempty.
    [Show full text]
  • DTIME, NTIME, DSPACE, Measured on Multi-Tape Turing Machines. Th
    CMPSCI 601: Recall From Last Time Lecture 9 Def: DTIME, NTIME, DSPACE, measured on Multi-tape Turing Machines. ¡¤£¥§ © £¡¤£¥§§© Th: DTIME ¢¡¤£¦¥¨§ © RAM-TIME DTIME ¥© L DSPACE + ¥! #"%$'&(© ¥ © ) * P DTIME +-, DTIME $ + #"%$'& ¥ © ¥ © * ) NP NTIME +-, NTIME $ + ¥! ."/$ &0© ¢¥ © ) * PSPACE DSPACE +-, DSPACE $ ¥43657£¦¥§81 ¥ Th: For ¡¤£¥§21 , ¢¡¤£¦¥§:© ¡9£¦¥§ © DTIME ¡9£¦¥§ © NTIME DSPACE #">"@?9&%& =< © DSPACE ;57£¦¥§:© DTIME Cor: L P NP PSPACE 1 CMPSCI 601: NTIME and NP Lecture 9 ¢¡¤£¦¥¨§ © £¦¡¤£¦¥§§ NTIME probs. accepted by NTMs in time + ."/$ & ¢¥ © ¥ © ) * NP NTIME +-, NTIME $ Theorem 9.1 For any function ¡¤£¦¥§ , ¢¡¤£¦¥§:© ¡9£¦¥§ © DTIME ¡9£¦¥§ © NTIME DSPACE Proof: The first inclusion is obvious. For the second, £¡¤£¥§§ note that in space we can simulate all computa- £¡¤£¦¥¨§§ tions of length , so we will find the shortest ac- cepting one if it exists. ¡ =< #"£¢ " ?9&%&(© Recall: DSPACE ¡¤£¥§ © DTIME Corollary 9.2 L P NP PSPACE 2 So we can simulate NTM’s by DTM’s, at the cost of an exponential increase in the running time. It may be pos- sible to improve this simulation, though no essentially better one is known. If the cost could be reduced to poly- nomial, we would have that P NP. There is probably such a quantitative difference between the power of NTM’s and DTM’s. But note that qualita- tively there is no difference. If ¡ is the language of some NTM ¢ , it must also be r.e. because there is a DTM that £ searches through all computations of ¢ on , first of one ¡ ¤ ¥ step, then of two steps, and so on. If £ , will eventually find an accepting computation. If not, it will search forever. What about an NTM-based definition of “recursive” or “Turing-decidable” sets? This is less clear because NTM’s don’t decide – they just have a range of possible actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Complexity
    Advanced Complexity TD n◦3 Charlie Jacomme September 27, 2017 Exercise 1 : Space hierarchy theorem Using a diagonal argument, prove that for two space-constructible functions f and g such that f(n) = o(g(n)) (and as always f; g ≥ log) we have SPACE(f(n)) ( SPACE(g(n)). Solution: We dene a language which can be recognized using space O(g(n)) but not in f(n). L = f(M; w)jM reject w using space ≤ g(j(M; w)j andjΓj = 4g Where Γis the alphabet of the Turing Machine We show that L 2 SPACE(g(n)) by constructing the corresponding TM. This is where we need the fact that the alphabet is bounded. Indeed, we want to construct one xed machine that recognizes L for any TM M, and if we allow M to have an arbitrary size of alphabet, the xed machine might need a lot of space in order to represent the alphabet of M, and it might go over O(g(n)). On an input x, we compute g(x) and mark down an end of tape marker at position f(x), so that we reject if we use to much space. If x is not of the form (M; w), we reject, else we simulate M on w for at most jQj × 4g(x) × n steps. If we go over the timeout, we reject. Else, if w is accepted, we reject, and if w is rejected, we accept. This can be done in SPACE(O(g(n))), and we conclude with the speed up theorem.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Statistical Zero-Knowledge Proofs Salil Pravin
    A Study of Statistical Zero-Knowledge Proofs by Salil Pravin Vadhan A.B., Mathematics and Computer Science, Harvard University (1995) Certificate of Advanced Study in Mathematics, Cambridge University (1996) Submitted to the Department of Mathematics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 1999 @ Salil Pravin Vadhan, 1999. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. A uthor ........... .'v --~-- g -. - --- ---. - .---------------------------- Dtopartment of Mathematics August 6, 1999 ,/1 I; Certified by ....... .. .. - .. -. .... - ...- .. .-- fi Gold asser RSA Professor of Computer Science Thesis Supervisor .. V... ...... V J .. ................ Accepted by ......... c alS p. e Michael Sipser Chairman, Applied Mathematics Committee A A ccepted by ................. ...--.. - -- -- - Tomasz Mrowka Chairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Students MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE LIBRARIES A Study of Statistical Zero-Knowledge Proofs by Sail Pravin Vadhan Submitted to the Department of Mathematics on August 6, 1999, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract Zero-knowledge interactive proofs, introduced by Goldwasser, Micali, and Rackoff, are fas- cinating constructs which enable one party (the "prover") to convince another party (the "verifier") of an assertion, with the property that the verifier learns nothing other than the fact that the assertion being proven is true. In addition to being powerful tools for construct- ing secure cryptographic protocols, zero-knowledge proofs yield rich classes of computational problems that are of both complexity-theoretic and cryptographic interest. This thesis is a detailed investigation of statisticalzero-knowledge proofs, which are zero- knowledge proofs in which the condition that the verifier "learns nothing" is interpreted in a strong statistical sense.
    [Show full text]
  • The NP-Completeness of Some Lesser Known Logic Puzzles
    The NP-completeness of some lesser known logic puzzles Author: Mieke Maarse - 5750032 Supervisor: Dr. Benjamin Rin Second evaluator: Prof. dr. Michael Moortgat 7.5 ECTS Bachelor Kunstmatige Intelligentie Utrecht University June 28, 2019 1 Abstract Logic puzzles have been gaining popularity and many puzzles have been proved to be NP-complete. When a puzzle is NP-complete, it is not feasible to try to compute a solution. In this case algorithms that approximate the solution, or programs that are limited in input size can be used. In this paper we use the Hamiltonian path and cycle problems in grid graphs, and the Latin square completion problem to show that the puzzles unequal and adjacent, towers, chains and linesweeper are NP- complete. 2 Contents 1 Introduction4 1.1 The Hamiltonian path and cycle problem in grid graphs.....5 1.2 The Latin square completion problem...............6 1.3 Structure of this paper........................6 2 Trivial proofs7 2.1 unequal and adjacent .........................7 2.1.1 NP...............................8 2.1.2 NP-hardness.........................8 2.2 towers .................................8 2.2.1 NP...............................9 2.2.2 NP-hardness.........................9 3 chains 9 3.1 NP-completeness........................... 10 4 linesweeper 13 4.1 NP-completeness........................... 13 5 Conclusion 18 3 1 Introduction Logic puzzles are puzzles that can be solved through deductive reasoning, like sudoku or kakuro. These puzzles are satisfying to solve because, when finished, it is immediately clear if a solution is correct, but solving one is a challenge. This type of puzzle is gaining popularity, and so more research on the topic of these puzzles is being done [1][2].
    [Show full text]
  • Dspace Cover Page
    Efficient Semantic Communication via Compatible Beliefs The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Juba, Brendan and Madhu Sudan. "Efficient Semantic Communication via Compatible Beliefs." Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Innovations in Computer Science - ICS 2011, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, January 7-9, 2011. As Published http://conference.itcs.tsinghua.edu.cn/ICS2011/content/ paper/19.pdf Publisher Institute for Computer Science, Tsinghua University Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/64417 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ Efficient Semantic Communication via Compatible Beliefs∗ Brendan Juba Madhu Sudan Harvard University and MIT CSAIL Microsoft Research [email protected] [email protected] October 14, 2010 Abstract In previous works, Juba and Sudan [6] and Goldreich, Juba and Sudan [4] considered the idea of \semantic communication", wherein two players, a user and a server, attempt to communicate with each other without any prior common language (or communication) protocol. They showed that if communication was goal-oriented and the user could sense progress towards the goal (or verify when it has been achieved), then meaningful communication is possible, in that the user's goal can be achieved whenever the server is helpful. A principal criticism of their result has been that it is inefficient: in order to determine the \right" protocol to communicate with the server, the user enumerates protocols and tries them out with the server until it finds one that allows it to achieve its goal.
    [Show full text]