skip to main content
research-article

Complexity Theory for Operators in Analysis

Published:01 May 2012Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We propose an extension of the framework for discussing the computational complexity of problems involving uncountably many objects, such as real numbers, sets and functions, that can be represented only through approximation. The key idea is to use a certain class of string functions as names representing these objects. These are more expressive than infinite sequences, which served as names in prior work that formulated complexity in more restricted settings. An advantage of using string functions is that we can define their size in a way inspired by higher-type complexity theory. This enables us to talk about computation on string functions whose time or space is bounded polynomially in the input size, giving rise to more general analogues of the classes P, NP, and PSPACE. We also define NP- and PSPACE-completeness under suitable many-one reductions.

Because our framework separates machine computation and semantics, it can be applied to problems on sets of interest in analysis once we specify a suitable representation (encoding). As prototype applications, we consider the complexity of functions (operators) on real numbers, real sets, and real functions. For example, the task of numerical algorithms for solving a certain class of differential equations is naturally viewed as an operator taking real functions to real functions. As there was no complexity theory for operators, previous results only stated how complex the solution can be. We now reformulate them and show that the operator itself is polynomial-space complete.

References

  1. Asano, T., Matoušek, J., and Tokuyama, T. 2007. The distance trisector curve. Adv. Math. 212, 1, 338--360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Beame, P., Cook, S., Edmonds, J., Impagliazzo, R., and Pitassi, T. 1998. The relative complexity of NP search problems. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 57, 1, 3--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Brattka, V. and Gherardi, G. 2011. Weihrauch degrees, omniscience principles and weak computability. J. Symbolic Logic 76, 1, 143--176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Brattka, V., Hertling, P., and Weihrauch, K. 2008. A tutorial on computable analysis. In New Computational Paradigms: Changing Conceptions of What is Computable, S. B. Cooper, B. Löwe, and A. Sorbi Eds., Springer, 425--491.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Braverman, M. 2005. On the complexity of real functions. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS). 155--164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Goldreich, O. 2008. Computational Complexity: A Conceptual Perspective. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Hoover, H. J. 1990. Feasible real functions and arithmetic circuits. SIAM J. Comput. 19, 1, 182--204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Imai, K., Kawamura, A., Matoušek, J., Reem, D., and Tokuyama, T. 2010. Distance k-sectors exist. Comput. Geom. 43, 9, 713--720. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Kapron, B. M. and Cook, S. A. 1996. A new characterization of type-2 feasibility. SIAM J. Comput. 25, 1, 117--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Kawamura, A. 2010. Lipschitz continuous ordinary differential equations are polynomial-space complete. Comput. Complexity 19, 2, 305--332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Kawamura, A., Matoušek, J., and Tokuyama, T. 2012. Zone diagrams in Euclidean spaces and in other normed spaces. Math. Ann. To appear.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ko, K. 1983. On the computational complexity of ordinary differential equations. Inform. Contr. 58, 157--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Ko, K. 1991. Complexity Theory of Real Functions. Birkhäuser, Boston. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ko, K. 1992. On the computational complexity of integral equations. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 58, 3, 201--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Ko, K. 1998. Polynomial-time computability in analysis. In Handbook of Recursive Mathematics: Vol. 2: Recursive Algebra, Analysis and Combinatorics, I. L. Ershov et al., Eds., Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 139, North-Holland, 1271--1317.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ko, K. and Friedman, H. 1982. Computational complexity of real functions. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 20, 3, 323--352.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Ko, K. and Yu, F. 2008. On the complexity of convex hulls of subsets of the two-dimensional plane. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computability and Complexity in Analysis (CCA).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lambov, B. 2006. The basic feasible functionals in computable analysis. J. Complexity 22, 6, 909--917. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Mehlhorn, K. 1976. Polynomial and abstract subrecursive classes. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 12, 2, 147--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Ota, H., Kawamura, A., Ziegler, M., and Rösnick, C. 2012. Complexity of smooth ordinary differential equations. In Proceedings of the 10th EATCS/LA Workshop on Theoretical Computer Science. (In Japanese.)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Takeuti, I. 2001. Effective fixed point theorem over a non-computably separable metric space. In Computability and Complexity in Analysis, J. Blanck, V. Brattka, and P. Hertling Eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2064, Springer, 310--322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Wegener, I. 2003. Komplexitätstheorie: Grenzen der Effizienz von Algorithmen. Springer. (In German.)Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Weihrauch, K. 1992. The degrees of discontinuity of some translators between representations of the real numbers. Tech. rep. TR-92-050, International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Weihrauch, K. 2000. Computable Analysis: An Introduction. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Weihrauch, K. 2003. Computational complexity on computable metric spaces. Math. Logic Q. 49, 1, 3--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Zhao, X. and Müller, N. 2008. Complexity of operators on compact sets. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computability and Complexity in Analysis (CCA). 101--119. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Complexity Theory for Operators in Analysis

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!