A.Antonopoulos 18/1/2010

Similar documents
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.

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

Umans Complexity Theory Lectures

Lecture 7: Polynomial time hierarchy

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

CSC 5170: Theory of Computational Complexity Lecture 9 The Chinese University of Hong Kong 15 March 2010

Theoretical Computer Science 2

CS 151 Complexity Theory Spring Solution Set 5

1 PSPACE-Completeness

CS154, Lecture 17: conp, Oracles again, Space Complexity

NP-COMPLETE PROBLEMS. 1. Characterizing NP. Proof

CS21 Decidability and Tractability

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

Lecture 20: conp and Friends, Oracles in Complexity Theory

NP Complete Problems. COMP 215 Lecture 20

Theory of Computation Chapter 9

CS 6505, Complexity and Algorithms Week 7: NP Completeness

conp, Oracles, Space Complexity

Definition: conp = { L L NP } What does a conp computation look like?

Computational Complexity

Lecture 19: Finish NP-Completeness, conp and Friends

Approximation Preserving Reductions

satisfiability (sat) Satisfiability unsatisfiability (unsat or sat complement) and validity Any Expression φ Can Be Converted into CNFs and DNFs

De Morgan s a Laws. De Morgan s laws say that. (φ 1 φ 2 ) = φ 1 φ 2, (φ 1 φ 2 ) = φ 1 φ 2.

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

Ma/CS 117c Handout # 5 P vs. NP

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

CSE 555 HW 5 SAMPLE SOLUTION. Question 1.

NP-problems continued

Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated: October, Lecture 6

Lecture 23: Alternation vs. Counting

Formal definition of P

NP-Complete Reductions 2

an efficient procedure for the decision problem. We illustrate this phenomenon for the Satisfiability problem.

Limitations of Algorithm Power

NP-problems continued

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

Limits to Approximability: When Algorithms Won't Help You. Note: Contents of today s lecture won t be on the exam

6.840 Language Membership

Introduction to Advanced Results

Lecture 13, Fall 04/05

Lecture 22: Counting

CS154, Lecture 15: Cook-Levin Theorem SAT, 3SAT

The Polynomial Hierarchy

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

SAT, NP, NP-Completeness

Lecture 8: Alternatation. 1 Alternate Characterizations of the Polynomial Hierarchy

Lecture 24: Randomized Complexity, Course Summary

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

The Class NP. NP is the problems that can be solved in polynomial time by a nondeterministic machine.

1 From previous lectures

Essential facts about NP-completeness:

NP-Completeness. A language B is NP-complete iff B NP. This property means B is NP hard

Non-Approximability Results (2 nd part) 1/19

Lecture 18: PCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation I

UC Berkeley CS 170: Efficient Algorithms and Intractable Problems Handout 22 Lecturer: David Wagner April 24, Notes 22 for CS 170

Ταουσάκος Θανάσης Αλγόριθμοι και Πολυπλοκότητα II 7 Φεβρουαρίου 2013

NP and NP-Completeness

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

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

NP-Completeness. Subhash Suri. May 15, 2018

Quantum Complexity Theory. Wim van Dam HP Labs MSRI UC Berkeley SQUINT 3 June 16, 2003

NP and conp. Theorem. Skoulakis Stratis NP,coNP and Funtion Problems EuroCG 14, Ein-Gedi, Israel 1 / 18

CS 320, Fall Dr. Geri Georg, Instructor 320 NP 1

Technische Universität München Summer term 2010 Theoretische Informatik August 2, 2010 Dr. J. Kreiker / Dr. M. Luttenberger, J. Kretinsky SOLUTION

Computational Intractability 2010/4/15. Lecture 2

Finish K-Complexity, Start Time Complexity

CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 14 May 17, 2017

ITCS:CCT09 : Computational Complexity Theory Apr 8, Lecture 7

Computational Complexity Theory

Lecture 4 : Quest for Structure in Counting Problems

Harvard CS 121 and CSCI E-121 Lecture 22: The P vs. NP Question and NP-completeness

6-1 Computational Complexity

Lecture 3: Nondeterminism, NP, and NP-completeness

NP-Complete Problems. More reductions

NP Completeness. Richard Karp, 1972.

Time and space classes

More NP-Complete Problems

INAPPROX APPROX PTAS. FPTAS Knapsack P

Lecture 17: Cook-Levin Theorem, NP-Complete Problems

CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 4 April 12, 2017

Lecture 59 : Instance Compression and Succinct PCP s for NP

Logarithmic space. Evgenij Thorstensen V18. Evgenij Thorstensen Logarithmic space V18 1 / 18

Lecture Notes Each circuit agrees with M on inputs of length equal to its index, i.e. n, x {0, 1} n, C n (x) = M(x).

Lecture 17. In this lecture, we will continue our discussion on randomization.

The knapsack Problem

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

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

Theory of Computation CS3102 Spring 2014 A tale of computers, math, problem solving, life, love and tragic death

Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Handout 8 Luca Trevisan 4/21/2010

Lecture 12: Interactive Proofs

Notes for Lecture 3... x 4

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

Database Theory VU , SS Complexity of Query Evaluation. Reinhard Pichler

The Complexity of Optimization Problems

CS21 Decidability and Tractability

Complexity Classes V. More PCPs. Eric Rachlin

NP-Completeness I. Lecture Overview Introduction: Reduction and Expressiveness

1 Reductions and Expressiveness

Transcription:

Class DP Basic orems 18/1/2010

Class DP Basic orems 1 Class DP 2 Basic orems

Class DP Basic orems TSP Versions 1 TSP (D) 2 EXACT TSP 3 TSP COST 4 TSP (1) P (2) P (3) P (4)

DP Class Class DP Basic orems A language L is in the class DP if and only if there are two languages L 1 NP and L 2 conp such that L = L 1 L 2. DP is not NP conp! Also, DP is a syntactic class, and so it has complete problems.

DP Class Class DP Basic orems A language L is in the class DP if and only if there are two languages L 1 NP and L 2 conp such that L = L 1 L 2. DP is not NP conp! Also, DP is a syntactic class, and so it has complete problems. SAT-UNSAT Given two Boolean expressions φ, φ, both in 3CNF. Is it true that φ is satisfiable and φ is not?

Complete for DP Class DP Basic orems

Complete for DP orem SAT-UNSAT is DP-complete. Class DP Basic orems

Complete for DP Class DP Basic orems orem SAT-UNSAT is DP-complete. Proof Firstly, we have to show it is in DP. So, let: L 1 ={(φ, φ ): φ is satisfiable}. L 2 ={(φ, φ ): φ is unsatisfiable}. It is easy to see, L 1 NP and L 2 conp, thus L L 1 L 2 DP. For completeness, let L DP. We have to show that L P SAT-UNSAT. L DP L = L 1 L 2, L 1 NP and L 2 conp. SAT NP-complete R 1 :L 1 P SAT and R 2 :L 2 P SAT. Hence, L P SAT-UNSAT,by R(x) = (R 1 (x), R 2 (x))

Complete for DP Class DP Basic orems orem EXACT TSP is DP-complete. Proof EXACT TSP DP, by L 1 TSP NP and L 2 TSP COMPLEMENT conp Completeness: we ll show that SAT-UNSAT P EXACT TSP. 3SAT P HP: (φ, φ ) (G, G ) Broken Hamilton Path (2 node-disjoint paths that cover all nodes) Almost Satisfying Truth Assignement (satisfies all clauses except for one)

Complete for DP Class DP Basic orems Proof We define distances: 1 If (i, j) E(G) or E(G ): d(i, j) 1 2 If (i, j) / E(G), but i and j V(G): d(i, j) 2 3 Otherwise: d(i, j) 4 Let n be the size of the graph. 1 If φ and φ satisfiable, then optcost = n 2 If φ and φ unsatisfiable, then optcost = n + 3 3 If φ satisfiable and φ not, then optcost = n + 2 4 If φ satisfiable and φ not, then optcost = n + 1 yes instance of SAT-UNSAT optcost = n + 2 Let B n + 2!

Other DP-complete problems Class DP Basic orems Also: CRITICAL SAT: Given a Boolean expression φ, is it true that it s unsatisfiable, but deleting any clause makes it satisfiable? CRITICAL HAMILTON PATH: Given a graph, is it true that it has no Hamilton path, but addition of any edge creates a Hamilton path? CRITICAL 3-COLORABILITY: Given a graph, is it true that it is not 3-colorable, but deletion of any node makes it 3-colorable? are DP-complete!

Classes P NP and FP NP Class DP Basic orems Alternative DP DP is the class of languages that can be decided by an oracle machine which makes 2 queries to a SAT oracle, and accepts iff the 1st answer is yes, and the 2nd is no. P SAT is the class of languages decided in pol time with a SAT oracle. number of queries Queries computed adaptively SAT NP-complete P SAT =P NP FP NP is the class of functions that can be computed by a pol-time TM with a SAT oracle. Goal: MAX OUTPUT P MAX-WEIGHT SAT P SAT

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems MAX OUTPUT Given NTM N, with input 1 n, which halts after O(n),with output a string of length n. Which is the largest output,of any computation of N on 1 n?

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems MAX OUTPUT Given NTM N, with input 1 n, which halts after O(n),with output a string of length n. Which is the largest output,of any computation of N on 1 n?

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems MAX OUTPUT Given NTM N, with input 1 n, which halts after O(n),with output a string of length n. Which is the largest output,of any computation of N on 1 n? orem MAX OUTPUT is FP NP -complete. Proof MAX OUTPUT FP NP. Let F : Σ Σ FP NP pol-time TM M?, s.t. M SAT (x) = F (x) We ll show: F MAX OUTPUT! Reductions R and S (log space computable) s.t.: x, R(x) is a instance of MAX OUTPUT S(max output of R(x)) F (x)

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems Proof NTM N: Let n = p 2 ( x ), p( ), is the pol bound of SAT. N(1 n ) generates x on a string. M SAT query state (φ 1 ): If z 1 = 0 (φ 1 unsat), then continue from q NO. If z 1 = 1 (φ 1 sat), then guess assignment T 1 : If test succeeds, continue from q YES. If test fails, output=0 n and halt. (Unsuccessful computation) Continue to all guesses (z i ), and halt, with output= z 1 z 2...00 }{{} n (Successful computation)

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems Proof We claim that the successful computation that outputs the largest integer, correspond to a correct simulation: Let j the smallest integer,s.t.: z j = 0, while φ j was satisfiable. n, another successful computation of N, s.t.: z j = 1. computations agree to the first j 1 digits, the 2 nd represents a larger number. S part: F (x) can be read off the end of the largest output of N.

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems MAX-WEIGHT SAT Given a set of clauses, each with an integer weight, find the truth assignment that satisfies a set of clauses with the most total weight.

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems MAX-WEIGHT SAT Given a set of clauses, each with an integer weight, find the truth assignment that satisfies a set of clauses with the most total weight. orem MAX-WEIGHT SAT is FP NP -complete. Proof MAX-WEIGHT SAT is in FP NP : By binary search, and a SAT oracle, we can find the largest possible total weight of satisfied clauses, and then, by setting the variables 1-1, the truth assignment that achieves it. MAX OUTPUT MAX-WEIGHT SAT:

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems Proof NTMN(1 n ) φ(n, m): Any satisfying truth assignment of φ(n, m) legal comp. of N(1 n ) Clauses are given a huge weight (2 n ), so that any t.a. that aspires to be optimum satisfy all clauses of φ(n, m). Add more clauses: (y i ): i = 1,..n with weight 2 n i. Now, optimum t.a. must not represent any legal computation, but this which produces the largest possible output value. S part: From optimum t.a. of the resulting expression (or the weight), we can recover the optimum output of N(1 n ).

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems And the main result: orem TSP is FP NP -complete.

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems And the main result: orem TSP is FP NP -complete. Corollary TSP COST is FP NP -complete.

FP NP -complete Class DP Basic orems Figure: overall construction (17-2)

NP[log n] Class P Class DP Basic orems P NP[logn] is the class of all languages decided by a polynomial time oracle machine, which on input x asks a total of O(log x ) SAT queries. FP NP[logn] is the corresponding class of functions.

NP[log n] Class P Class DP Basic orems P NP[logn] is the class of all languages decided by a polynomial time oracle machine, which on input x asks a total of O(log x ) SAT queries. FP NP[logn] is the corresponding class of functions. CLIQUE SIZE Given a graph, determine the size of his largest clique.

NP[log n] Class P Class DP Basic orems P NP[logn] is the class of all languages decided by a polynomial time oracle machine, which on input x asks a total of O(log x ) SAT queries. FP NP[logn] is the corresponding class of functions. CLIQUE SIZE Given a graph, determine the size of his largest clique. orem CLIQUE SIZE is FP NP[logn] -complete.

Conclusion Class DP Basic orems 1 TSP (D) is NP-complete. 2 EXACT TSP is DP-complete. 3 TSP COST is FP NP -complete. 4 TSP is FP NP -complete. And now, P NP NP NP? Oracles for NP NP?

Class DP Basic orems 1 Class DP 2 Basic orems

Class DP Basic orems 0 P = Σ 0 P = Π 0 P = P i+1 P = P Σ i P Σ i+1 P = NP Σ i P Π i+1 P = conp Σ i P PH i 0 Σ i P

Class DP Basic orems 0 P = Σ 0 P = Π 0 P = P i+1 P = P Σ i P Σ i+1 P = NP Σ i P Π i+1 P = conp Σ i P PH i 0 Σ i P

Class DP Basic orems 0 P = Σ 0 P = Π 0 P = P i+1 P = P Σ i P Σ i+1 P = NP Σ i P Π i+1 P = conp Σ i P PH i 0 Σ i P Σ 0 P = P 1 P = P, Σ 1 P = NP, Π 1 P = conp 2 P = P NP, Σ 2 P = NP NP, Π 2 P = conp NP

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem Let L be a language, and i 1. L Σ i P iff there is a polynomially balanced relation R such that the language {x; y : (x, y) R} is in Π i 1 P and Proof (by Induction) L = {x : y, s.t. : (x, y) R} For i = 1 {x; y : (x, y) R} P,so L = {x y : (x, y) R} NP For i > 1 If R Π i 1 P, we must show that L Σ i P NTM with Σ i 1 P oracle: NTM(x) guesses a y and asks Σ i 1 P oracle whether (x, y) / R.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Proof If L Σ i P, we must show the existence or R. L Σ i P NTM M K, K Σ i 1 P, which decides L. K Σ i 1 P S Π i 2 P : (z K w : (z, w) S) We must describe a relation R (we know: x L accepting comp of M K (x)) Query Steps: yes z i has a cerfificate w i st (z i, w i ) S. So, R(x) = (x, y) R iff yrecords an accepting computation of M? on x, together with a certificate w i for each yes query z i in the computation. We must show {x; y : (x, y) R} Π i 1 P.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Corollary Let L be a language, and i 1. L Π i P iff there is a polynomially balanced relation R such that the language {x; y : (x, y) R} is in Σ i 1 P and Corollary L = {x : y, y x k, s.t. : (x, y) R} Let L be a language, and i 1. L Σ i P iff there is a polynomially balanced, polynomially-time decicable (i + 1)-ary relation R such that: L = {x : y 1 y 2 y 3...Qy i, s.t. : (x, y 1,..., y i ) R} where the i th quantifier Q is, if i is even, and, if i is odd.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem If for some i 1, Σ i P = Π i P, then for all j > i: Σ j P = Π j P = j P = Σ i P Or, the polynomial hierarchy collapses to the i th level. Proof It suffices to show that: Σ i P = Π i P Σ i+1 P = Σ i P Let L Σ i+1 P R Π i P: L = {x y : (x, y) R} Since Π i P = Σ i P R Σ i P (x, y) R z : (x, y, z) S, S Π i 1 P. Thus, x L y; z : (x, y, z) S, S Π i 1 P, which means L Σ i P.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Corollary If P=NP, or even NP=coNP, the collapses to the first level.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Corollary If P=NP, or even NP=coNP, the collapses to the first level. MINIMUM CIRCUIT Given a Boolean Circuit C, is it true that there is no circuit with fewer gates that computes the same Boolean function

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Corollary If P=NP, or even NP=coNP, the collapses to the first level. MINIMUM CIRCUIT Given a Boolean Circuit C, is it true that there is no circuit with fewer gates that computes the same Boolean function

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems Corollary If P=NP, or even NP=coNP, the collapses to the first level. MINIMUM CIRCUIT Given a Boolean Circuit C, is it true that there is no circuit with fewer gates that computes the same Boolean function MINIMUM CIRCUIT is in Π 2 P, and not known to be in any class below that. It is open whether MINIMUM CIRCUIT is Π 2 P-complete.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems QSAT i Given expression φ, with Boolean variables partitioned into i sets X i,is φ satisfied by the overall truth assignment of the expression: X 1 X 2 X 3...QX i φ, where Q is if i is odd, and if i is even.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems QSAT i Given expression φ, with Boolean variables partitioned into i sets X i,is φ satisfied by the overall truth assignment of the expression: X 1 X 2 X 3...QX i φ, where Q is if i is odd, and if i is even. orem For all i 1 QSAT i is Σ i P-complete.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem If there is a PH-complete problem, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses to some finite level. Proof Let L is PH-complete. Since L PH, i 0 : L Σ i P. But any L Σ i+1 P reduces to L. Since PH is closed under reductions, we imply that L Σ i P, so Σ i P = Σ i+1 P.

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem If there is a PH-complete problem, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses to some finite level. Proof Let L is PH-complete. Since L PH, i 0 : L Σ i P. But any L Σ i+1 P reduces to L. Since PH is closed under reductions, we imply that L Σ i P, so Σ i P = Σ i+1 P. orem PH PSPACE

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem If there is a PH-complete problem, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses to some finite level. Proof Let L is PH-complete. Since L PH, i 0 : L Σ i P. But any L Σ i+1 P reduces to L. Since PH is closed under reductions, we imply that L Σ i P, so Σ i P = Σ i+1 P. orem PH PSPACE

Basic orems Class DP Basic orems orem If there is a PH-complete problem, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses to some finite level. Proof Let L is PH-complete. Since L PH, i 0 : L Σ i P. But any L Σ i+1 P reduces to L. Since PH is closed under reductions, we imply that L Σ i P, so Σ i P = Σ i+1 P. orem PH PSPACE PH? = PSPACE (Open). If it was, then PH has complete problems, so it collapses to some finite level.

Class DP Basic orems orem BPP Σ 2 P Π 2 P Proof Because cobpp = BPP,we prove only BPP Σ 2 P. Let L BPP (L is accepted by clear majority ). For x = n, let A(x) {0, 1} p(n) be the set of accepting computations. We have: x L A(x) 2 p(n) ( 1 1 2 n ) x / L A(x) 2 p(n) ( 1 2 n ) Let U be the set of all bit strings of length p(n). For a, b U, let a b be the XOR: a b = c c b = a, so b is 1-1.

Class DP Basic orems Proof For t U, A(x) t = {a t : a A(x)} (translation of A(x) by t). We imply that: A(x) t = A(x) If x L, consider a random (drawing p 2 (n) bits) sequence of translations: t 1, t 2,.., t p(n) U. For b U, these translations cover b, if b A(x) t j, j p(n). b A(x) t j b t j A(x) Pr[b / A(x) t j ]= 1 2 n Pr[b is not covered by any t j ]=2 np(n) Pr[ point that is not covered] 2 np(n) U = 2 (n 1)p(n)

Class DP Basic orems Proof So,T = (t 1,.., t p(n) ) has a positive probability that it covers all of U. If x / L, A(x) is exp small,and (for large n) there s not T that cover all U. (x L) ( T that cover all U) So, L = {x (T {0, 1} p2 (n) ) (b U) (j p(n)) : b t j A(x)} which is precisely the form of languages in Σ 2 P. last existential quantifier ( (j p(n))...) affects only polynomially many possibilities,so it doesn t count (can by tested in polynomial time by trying all t j s).