Results 1  10
of
67
The NPcompleteness column: an ongoing guide
 Journal of Algorithms
, 1985
"... This is the nineteenth edition of a (usually) quarterly column that covers new developments in the theory of NPcompleteness. The presentation is modeled on that used by M. R. Garey and myself in our book ‘‘Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NPCompleteness,’ ’ W. H. Freeman & Co ..."
Abstract

Cited by 188 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This is the nineteenth edition of a (usually) quarterly column that covers new developments in the theory of NPcompleteness. The presentation is modeled on that used by M. R. Garey and myself in our book ‘‘Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NPCompleteness,’ ’ W. H. Freeman & Co., New York, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘[G&J]’’; previous columns will be referred to by their dates). A background equivalent to that provided by [G&J] is assumed, and, when appropriate, crossreferences will be given to that book and the list of problems (NPcomplete and harder) presented there. Readers who have results they would like mentioned (NPhardness, PSPACEhardness, polynomialtimesolvability, etc.) or open problems they would like publicized, should
A Taxonomy of Complexity Classes of Functions
 Journal of Computer and System Sciences
, 1992
"... This paper comprises a systematic comparison of several complexity classes of functions that are computed nondeterministically in polynomial time or with an oracle in NP. There are three components to this work. ffl A taxonomy is presented that demonstrates all known inclusion relations of these cla ..."
Abstract

Cited by 88 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper comprises a systematic comparison of several complexity classes of functions that are computed nondeterministically in polynomial time or with an oracle in NP. There are three components to this work. ffl A taxonomy is presented that demonstrates all known inclusion relations of these classes. For (nearly) each inclusion that is not shown to hold, evidence is presented to indicate that the inclusion is false. As an example, consider FewPF, the class of multivalued functions that are nondeterministically computable in polynomial time such that for each x, there is a polynomial bound on the number of distinct output values of f(x). We show that FewPF ` PF NP tt . However, we show PF NP tt ` FewPF if and only if NP = coNP, and thus PF NP tt ` FewPF is likely to be false. ffl Whereas it is known that P NP (O(log n)) = P NP tt ` P NP [Hem87, Wagb, BH88], we show that PF NP (O(log n)) = PF NP tt implies P = FewP and R = NP. Also, we show that PF NP tt = PF ...
Toward Logic Tailored for Computational Complexity
 COMPUTATION AND PROOF THEORY
, 1984
"... Whereas firstorder logic was developed to confront the infinite it is often used in computer science in such a way that infinite models are meaningless. We discuss the firstorder theory of finite structures and alternatives to firstorder logic, especially polynomial time logic. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 75 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Whereas firstorder logic was developed to confront the infinite it is often used in computer science in such a way that infinite models are meaningless. We discuss the firstorder theory of finite structures and alternatives to firstorder logic, especially polynomial time logic.
Counting Classes: Thresholds, Parity, Mods, and Fewness
, 1996
"... Counting classes consist of languages defined in terms of the number of accepting computations of nondeterministic polynomialtime Turing machines. Well known examples of counting classes are NP, coNP, \PhiP, and PP. Every counting class is a subset of P #P[1] , the class of languages computable ..."
Abstract

Cited by 61 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Counting classes consist of languages defined in terms of the number of accepting computations of nondeterministic polynomialtime Turing machines. Well known examples of counting classes are NP, coNP, \PhiP, and PP. Every counting class is a subset of P #P[1] , the class of languages computable in polynomial time using a single call to an oracle capable of determining the number of accepting paths of an NP machine. Using closure properties of #P, we systematically develop a complexity theory for counting classes defined in terms of thresholds and moduli. An unexpected result is that MOD k iP = MOD k P for prime k. Finally, we improve a result of Cai and Hemachandra by showing that recognizing languages in the class Few is as easy as distinguishing uniquely satisfiable formulas from unsatisfiable formulas (or detecting unique solutions, as in [28]). 1. Introduction Valiant [27] defined the class #P of functions whose values equal the number of accepting paths of polynomialtime bo...
A Complexity Theory for Feasible Closure Properties
, 1991
"... The study of the complexity of sets encompasses two complementary aims: (1) establishing  usually via explicit construction of algorithms  that sets are feasible, and (2) studying the relative complexity of sets that plausibly might be feasible but are not currently known to be feasible (such as ..."
Abstract

Cited by 47 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The study of the complexity of sets encompasses two complementary aims: (1) establishing  usually via explicit construction of algorithms  that sets are feasible, and (2) studying the relative complexity of sets that plausibly might be feasible but are not currently known to be feasible (such as the NPcomplete sets and the PSPACEcomplete sets). For the study of the complexity of closure properties, a recent urry of results [21, 33, 49, 6, 7, 16] has established an analog of (1); these papers explicitly demonstrate many closure properties possessed by PP and C=P (and the proofs implicitly give closure properties of the function class #P). The present paper presents and develops, for function classes such as #P, SpanP, OptP, and MidP, an analog of (2): a general theory of the complexity of closure properties. In particular, we show that subtraction is hard for the closure properties of each of these classes: each is closed under subtraction if and only if it is closed under every polynom...
Structure and Importance of LogspaceMODClasses
, 1992
"... . We refine the techniques of Beigel, Gill, Hertrampf [4] who investigated polynomial time counting classes, in order to make them applicable to the case of logarithmic space. We define the complexity classes MOD k L and demonstrate their significance by proving that all standard problems of linear ..."
Abstract

Cited by 40 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We refine the techniques of Beigel, Gill, Hertrampf [4] who investigated polynomial time counting classes, in order to make them applicable to the case of logarithmic space. We define the complexity classes MOD k L and demonstrate their significance by proving that all standard problems of linear algebra over the finite rings Z/kZ are complete for these classes. We then define new complexity classes LogFew and LogFewNL and identify them as adequate logspace versions of Few and FewP. We show that LogFewNL is contained in MODZ k L and that LogFew is contained in MOD k L for all k. Also an upper bound for L #L in terms of computation of integer determinants is given from which we conclude that all logspace counting classes are contained in NC 2 . 1 Introduction Valiant [21] defined the class #P of functions f such that there is a nondeterministic polynomial time Turing machine which, on input x, has exactly f(x) accepting computation paths. Many complexity classes in the area betw...
Making Nondeterminism Unambiguous
, 1997
"... We show that in the context of nonuniform complexity, nondeterministic logarithmic space bounded computation can be made unambiguous. An analogous result holds for the class of problems reducible to contextfree languages. In terms of complexity classes, this can be stated as: NL/poly = UL/poly Lo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 37 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show that in the context of nonuniform complexity, nondeterministic logarithmic space bounded computation can be made unambiguous. An analogous result holds for the class of problems reducible to contextfree languages. In terms of complexity classes, this can be stated as: NL/poly = UL/poly LogCFL/poly = UAuxPDA(log n; n O(1) )/poly
The complexity of decision versus search
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 1994
"... A basic question about NP is whether or not search reduces in polynomial time to decision. We indicate that the answer is negative: under a complexity assumption (that deterministic and nondeterministic doubleexponential time are unequal) we construct a language in NP for which search does not red ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A basic question about NP is whether or not search reduces in polynomial time to decision. We indicate that the answer is negative: under a complexity assumption (that deterministic and nondeterministic doubleexponential time are unequal) we construct a language in NP for which search does not reduce to decision. These ideas extend in a natural way to interactive proofs and program checking. Under similar assumptions we present languages in NP for which it is harder to prove membership interactively than it is to decide this membership, and languages in NP which are not checkable. Keywords: NPcompleteness, selfreducibility, interactive proofs, program checking, sparse sets,
On the Power of NumberTheoretic Operations with Respect to Counting
 IN PROCEEDINGS 10TH STRUCTURE IN COMPLEXITY THEORY
, 1995
"... We investigate function classes h#Pi f which are defined as the closure of #P under the operation f and a set of known closure properties of #P, e.g. summation over an exponential range. First, we examine operations f under which #P is closed (i.e., h#Pi f = #P) in every relativization. We obtain t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We investigate function classes h#Pi f which are defined as the closure of #P under the operation f and a set of known closure properties of #P, e.g. summation over an exponential range. First, we examine operations f under which #P is closed (i.e., h#Pi f = #P) in every relativization. We obtain the following complete characterization of these operations: #P is closed under f in every relativization if and only if f is a finite sum of binomial coefficients over constants. Second, we characterize operations f with respect to their power in the counting context in the unrelativized case. For closure properties f of #P, we have h#Pi f = #P. The other end of the range is marked by operations f for which h#Pi f corresponds to the counting hierarchy. We call these operations counting hard and give general criteria for hardness. For many operations f we show that h#Pi f corresponds to some subclass C of the counting hierarchy. This will then imply that #P is closed under f if and only if ...