CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

Similar documents
CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

Lecture 8. MINDNF = {(φ, k) φ is a CNF expression and DNF expression ψ s.t. ψ k and ψ is equivalent to φ}

Lecture 20: PSPACE. November 15, 2016 CS 1010 Theory of Computation

Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated: October, Lecture 6

1 PSPACE-Completeness

Space is a computation resource. Unlike time it can be reused. Computational Complexity, by Fu Yuxi Space Complexity 1 / 44

Space and Nondeterminism

Lecture 22: PSPACE

Space Complexity. Master Informatique. Université Paris 5 René Descartes. Master Info. Complexity Space 1/26

P = k T IME(n k ) Now, do all decidable languages belong to P? Let s consider a couple of languages:

CS256 Applied Theory of Computation

Computability and Complexity CISC462, Fall 2018, Space complexity 1

Space Complexity. The space complexity of a program is how much memory it uses.

Theory of Computation Space Complexity. (NTU EE) Space Complexity Fall / 1

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

PSPACE COMPLETENESS TBQF. THURSDAY April 17

Space Complexity. Huan Long. Shanghai Jiao Tong University

COMPLEXITY THEORY. PSPACE = SPACE(n k ) k N. NPSPACE = NSPACE(n k ) 10/30/2012. Space Complexity: Savitch's Theorem and PSPACE- Completeness

CSE 555 HW 5 SAMPLE SOLUTION. Question 1.

The Polynomial Hierarchy

MTAT Complexity Theory October 20th-21st, Lecture 7

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

Lecture 7: The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. 1 Nondeterministic Space is Closed under Complement

Umans Complexity Theory Lectures

Chapter 1 - Time and Space Complexity. deterministic and non-deterministic Turing machine time and space complexity classes P, NP, PSPACE, NPSPACE

SOLUTION: SOLUTION: SOLUTION:

CSCI3390-Lecture 18: Why is the P =?NP Problem Such a Big Deal?

Lecture 9: PSPACE. PSPACE = DSPACE[n O(1) ] = NSPACE[n O(1) ] = ATIME[n O(1) ]

Lecture 23: More PSPACE-Complete, Randomized Complexity

6.841/18.405J: Advanced Complexity Wednesday, February 12, Lecture Lecture 3

Complexity Theory. Jörg Kreiker. Summer term Chair for Theoretical Computer Science Prof. Esparza TU München

CSE200: Computability and complexity Space Complexity

The space complexity of a standard Turing machine. The space complexity of a nondeterministic Turing machine

Lecture 8: Complete Problems for Other Complexity Classes

INAPPROX APPROX PTAS. FPTAS Knapsack P

P, NP, and Beyond. Hengfeng Wei. May 01 May 04, Hengfeng Wei P, NP, and Beyond May 01 May 04, / 29

6.840 Language Membership

: Computational Complexity Lecture 3 ITCS, Tsinghua Univesity, Fall October 2007

CSCI 1010 Models of Computa3on. Lecture 11 Proving Languages NP-Complete

CS5371 Theory of Computation. Lecture 23: Complexity VIII (Space Complexity)

Theorem 11.1 (Lund-Fortnow-Karloff-Nisan). There is a polynomial length interactive proof for the

Computational Complexity IV: PSPACE

Time and space classes

Outline. Complexity Theory. Example. Sketch of a log-space TM for palindromes. Log-space computations. Example VU , SS 2018

Theory of Computation. Ch.8 Space Complexity. wherein all branches of its computation halt on all

PSPACE, NPSPACE, L, NL, Savitch's Theorem. More new problems that are representa=ve of space bounded complexity classes

NP Complete Problems. COMP 215 Lecture 20

Week 2: Defining Computation

Quantified Boolean Formulas Part 1

Review of Basic Computational Complexity

COMPLEXITY THEORY. Lecture 17: The Polynomial Hierarchy. TU Dresden, 19th Dec Markus Krötzsch Knowledge-Based Systems

Circuits. Lecture 11 Uniform Circuit Complexity

Introduction to Computational Complexity

Definition: Alternating time and space Game Semantics: State of machine determines who

6.045J/18.400J: Automata, Computability and Complexity Final Exam. There are two sheets of scratch paper at the end of this exam.

Answers to the CSCE 551 Final Exam, April 30, 2008

CS5371 Theory of Computation. Lecture 23: Complexity VIII (Space Complexity)

CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 4 April 12, 2017

6.045 Final Exam Solutions

Lecture 3: Reductions and Completeness

A.Antonopoulos 18/1/2010

NP-Complete problems

Computability and Complexity Theory: An Introduction

Advanced topic: Space complexity

CS 6505, Complexity and Algorithms Week 7: NP Completeness

Lecture 7: Polynomial time hierarchy

Algorithmic Model Theory SS 2016

Lecture 11: Proofs, Games, and Alternation

Lecture : PSPACE IP

Complexity Theory VU , SS The Polynomial Hierarchy. Reinhard Pichler

Outline. Complexity Theory EXACT TSP. The Class DP. Definition. Problem EXACT TSP. Complexity of EXACT TSP. Proposition VU 181.

Lecture 12: Interactive Proofs

Fixed-parameter tractable reductions to SAT. Vienna University of Technology

Lecture 6: Oracle TMs, Diagonalization Limits, Space Complexity

Polynomial Hierarchy

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Lecture 5: The Landscape of Complexity Classes

Complete problems for classes in PH, The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy (PH) oracle is like a subroutine, or function in

CS5371 Theory of Computation. Lecture 24: Complexity IX (PSPACE-complete, L, NL, NL-complete)

Essential facts about NP-completeness:

Introduction to Advanced Results

CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 14 May 17, 2017

198:538 Complexity of Computation Lecture 16 Rutgers University, Spring March 2007

Introduction to Complexity Theory. Bernhard Häupler. May 2, 2006

POLYNOMIAL SPACE QSAT. Games. Polynomial space cont d

CS278: Computational Complexity Spring Luca Trevisan

Lecture 9: Polynomial-Time Hierarchy, Time-Space Tradeoffs

CS Lecture 29 P, NP, and NP-Completeness. k ) for all k. Fall The class P. The class NP

Theory of Computation

Complexity Theory 112. Space Complexity

Complexity Theory. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. November 2, 2005

Lecture 13, Fall 04/05

More Completeness, conp, FNP,etc. CS254 Chris Pollett Oct 30, 2006.

On the Expressiveness and Complexity of ATL

More Complexity. Klaus Sutner Carnegie Mellon University. Fall 2017

CS21 Decidability and Tractability

6-1 Computational Complexity

Show that the following problems are NP-complete

Transcription:

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity PSPACE-Complete Languages John E. Savage Brown University February 11, 2009 John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 1 / 10

Summary 1 Complexity Class Containment 2 Polynomial Time Hierarchy 3 PH-Complete Languages 4 Games and tqbf 5 tqbf is PSPACE-Complete John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 2 / 10

Complexity Classes from Last Lecture P, conp, Π p i and Σ p i PH PSPACE PSPACE = NPSPACE NP conp NP conp L 2 NP conp P NL L John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 3 / 10

Polynomial Time Hierarchy A language is in NP(coNP) if and only if it can be reduced in polynomial time to a statement of the form x b(x) ( x b(x)) By adding additional levels of quantification, as shown below, potentially new complexity classes are added. x 1 x 2 b(x 1,x 2 ) x 1 x 2 b(x 1,x 2 ) The sets of languages PTIME reducible to statements of this form are denoted Π p i and Σ p i respectively, when there are i alternations of existential and universal quantifiers and the outermost quantifier is and, respectively. Definition The Polynomial Hierarchy (PH) is defined as PH = i Σ p i John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 4 / 10

PH and PSPACE Definition A language L is PH-complete if a) L PH and b) all languages in PH are ptime reducible to L. It is not hard to see that PH PSPACE. If a PH-complete language exists, the polynomial hierarchy collapses. (See last lecture.) Definition tqbf denotes the family of quantified boolean formulas Ψ with an unbounded number of alternations that evaluate to True. Ψ = Q 1 x 1 Q 2 x 2...Q n x n φ(x 1, x 2,...,x n ) Here Q j denotes either universal ( ) or existential ( ) quantification. tqbf is an example of a PSPACE-complete language. John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 5 / 10

Games and tqbf Languages in NP are analogous to puzzles where we ask, Is there a solution?. By contrast, tqbf allows us to ask a seemingly harder question, Is there a winning strategy?. Player 1 can win if there is a choice for its variable such that for all choices by Player 2 there is a choice by Player 1, etc. In a game one player tries to account for all possible decisions that an opponent can make. Each level of alternation is like a single turn of the game. Unlike problems in NP, it does not appear that a certificate suffices to demonstrate membership in the class. Instead it seems necessary to provide the full set of alternatives implied by alternation of quantifiers. John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 6 / 10

Outline of Proof that tqbf is PSPACE-Complete Definition tqbf is PSPACE-complete if it is in PSPACE and every language L PSPACE can be reduced to tqbf in polynomial time. To show the second result, we use the following lemma on directed graphs. Lemma For G = (V,E) directed, let PATH G (a, b, k) have value 1 (0) if ( ) path from vertex a to vertex b in G of length 2 k. (Used in Savitch s Theorem.) It can be described by a tqbf of length O(kµ + PATH G (a, b, 0)) ) where µ and PATH G (a, b, 0) are lengths of v V and formula that determines if b is reachable from a in one step. The following expansion of PATH G (a, b, k) is from Savitch s Theorem. PATH G (a, b, k) = z PATH G (a, z, k 1) PATH G (z, b, k 1) Expanding this gives length-o(2 k PATH G (a, b, 0) ) instance of tqbf. John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 7 / 10

Reducing PATH Predicate to tqbf Efficiently To avoid expanding both PATH G (a, z, k 1) and PATH G (z, b, k 1), restate the expansion of PATH G (a, b, k) as shown below where p(u, v, a, z, b) (((u = a) (v = z)) ((u = z) (v = b))). PATH G (a, b, k) z (u, v) p(u, v, a, z, b) PATH G (u, v, k 1) Equality (u = v) and implication (u v) can be expressed as the Boolean formulas (u v) (ū v) and (ū v), respectively, giving PATH G (a, b, k) z (u, v) ( p(u, v, a, z, b) PATH G (u, v, k 1)) Notice that p(u, v, a, z, b) has 16µ literals where µ is the number of Boolean variables used to represent of each of u, v, a, z, b as a binary tuple. Applying the expansion to PATH G (u, v, k 1)) introduces two more quantifiers, increases the number of literals by 16µ, and expresses the result in terms of PATH G (u, v, k 2)). The hypothesis follows. John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 8 / 10

tqbf is PSPACE-Complete Theorem tqbf is PSPACE-Complete Proof We show that tqbf is in PSPACE Ψ = Q 1 x 1 Q 2 x 2...Q n x n φ(x 1, x 2,...,x n ) To show this, note that Ψ is the or of Ψ x1 =1 and Ψ x1 =0 when Q 1 = whereas it is the and when Q 1 =. Systematically run through all assignments to variables. For each assignment, evaluate a copy of the original φ(x 1, x 2,...,x n ). If φ(x 1, x 2,...,x n ) uses space m, this execution consumes space O(n + m). We now show that every language L PSPACE can be reduced in PTIME to tqbf. John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 9 / 10

tqbf is PSPACE-Complete Proof (cont.) As shown in the Lemma, an instance of PATH G (a, b, k) can be translated into an instance of tqbf of length O(k + PATH G (a, b, 0)). As in Savitch s Theorem, we now show that any language L PSPACE recognized by M can be reduced in PTIME to an instance of PATH G (a, b, k) such that k and PATH G (a, b, 0)) are polynomial in the input x. This provides a PTIME reduction from L to tqbf. Let G be config. graph G of M on input x with start and accept configs. C start and C accept (to ensure C accept is unique, modify M so it erases its tape after accepting). x is in L C accept is reachable from C start. k = O(S(n)) because there are O(c S(n) ) configs. in G, c a constant. PATH G (a, b, 0)) is polynomial in S(n) because there is a DTM that can recognise the language PATH G (a, b, 0)). Since it is in P, it can be reduced to an instance of sat of polynomial length in S(n). John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity February 11, 2009 10 / 10