Results 1  10
of
464
TimeSpace Tradeoff Lower Bounds for Randomized Computation of Decision Problems
 In Proc. of 41st FOCS
, 2000
"... We prove the first timespace lower bound tradeoffs for randomized computation of decision problems. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 35 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove the first timespace lower bound tradeoffs for randomized computation of decision problems.
SuperLinear TimeSpace Tradeoff Lower Bounds for Randomized Computation
, 2000
"... We prove the first timespace lower bound tradeoffs for randomized computation of decision problems. The bounds hold even in the case that the computation is allowed to have arbitrary probability of error on a small fraction of inputs. Our techniques are an extension of those used by Ajtai [Ajt99a, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 33 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove the first timespace lower bound tradeoffs for randomized computation of decision problems. The bounds hold even in the case that the computation is allowed to have arbitrary probability of error on a small fraction of inputs. Our techniques are an extension of those used by Ajtai [Ajt99a
TimeSpace TradeOffs for Longest Common Extensions
 In Proc. 23rd CPM, LNCS
, 2012
"... We revisit the longest common extension (LCE) problem, that is, preprocess a string T into a compact data structure that supports fast LCE queries. An LCE query takes a pair (i, j) of indices in T and returns the length of the longest common prefix of the suffixes of T starting at positions i and j. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We study the timespace tradeoffs for the problem, that is, the space used for the data structure vs. the worstcase time for answering an LCE query. Let n be the length of T. Given a parameter τ, 1 ≤ τ ≤ n, we show how to achieve either O(n/ τ) space and O(τ) query time, or O(n/τ) space and O(τ log
1 Optimal TimeSpace TradeOffs for Sorting
"... Abstract We study the fundamental problem of sorting in a sequential model of computation and in particular consider the timespace tradeoff (product of time and space) for thisproblem. Beame has shown a lower bound of \Omega (n2) for this product leaving a gap of a logarithmic factor up to the p ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract We study the fundamental problem of sorting in a sequential model of computation and in particular consider the timespace tradeoff (product of time and space) for thisproblem. Beame has shown a lower bound of \Omega (n2) for this product leaving a gap of a logarithmic factor up
TimeSpace Lower Bounds for Satisfiability
, 2004
"... We establish the first polynomial timespace lower bounds for satisfiability on general models of computation. We show that for any constant c less than the golden ratio there exists a positive constant d such that no deterministic randomaccess Turing machine can solve satisfiability in time n c an ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We establish the first polynomial timespace lower bounds for satisfiability on general models of computation. We show that for any constant c less than the golden ratio there exists a positive constant d such that no deterministic randomaccess Turing machine can solve satisfiability in time n c
TimeSpace Lower Bounds for the PolynomialTime Hierarchy on Randomized Machines
 SIAM JOURNAL ON COMPUTING
, 2006
"... We establish the first polynomialstrength timespace lower bounds for problems in the lineartime hierarchy on randomized machines with twosided error. We show that for any integer ℓ> 1 and constant c < ℓ, there exists a positive constant d such that QSAT ℓ cannot be computed by such machine ..."
Abstract

Cited by 16 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We establish the first polynomialstrength timespace lower bounds for problems in the lineartime hierarchy on randomized machines with twosided error. We show that for any integer ℓ> 1 and constant c < ℓ, there exists a positive constant d such that QSAT ℓ cannot be computed
Inductive TimeSpace Lower Bounds for SAT and Related Problems
 Computational Complexity
, 2005
"... Abstract. We improve upon indirect diagonalization arguments for lower bounds on explicit problems within the polynomial hierarchy. Our contributions are summarized as follows. 1. We present a technique that uniformly improves upon most known nonlinear time lower bounds for nondeterminism andalterna ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. For example, SAT cannot be solved by random access machines using n √ 3 time and subpolynomial space. 2. We show how indirect diagonalization leads to timespace lower bounds for computation with bounded nondeterminism. For both the random access and multitape Turing machine models, we prove that for all k
Better TimeSpace Lower Bounds for SAT and Related Problems
"... We make several improvements on time lower bounds for concrete problems in NP and PH. 1. We present an elementary technique based on “indirect diagonalization ” that uniformly improves upon the known nonlinear time lower bounds for nondeterminism and alternating computation, on both sublinear (n o(1 ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
√ 3 time and n o(1) space. The technique is a natural inductive approach, for which previous work is essentially its base case. 2. We show how indirect diagonalization can also yield timespace lower bounds for computation with bounded nondeterminism. One corollary is that for all k, there exists a
on Time–Space Tradeoffs for Branching
, 1999
"... We obtain the first nontrivial time–space tradeoff lower bound for functions f: {0, 1}nQ {0, 1} on general branching programs by exhibiting a Boolean function f that requires exponential size to be computed by any branching program of length (1+e) n, for some constant e> 0. We also give the fir ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We obtain the first nontrivial time–space tradeoff lower bound for functions f: {0, 1}nQ {0, 1} on general branching programs by exhibiting a Boolean function f that requires exponential size to be computed by any branching program of length (1+e) n, for some constant e> 0. We also give
Results 1  10
of
464