Abstract
We investigate autoreducibility properties of complete sets for NEXP under different polynomial-time reductions. Specifically, we show under some polynomial-time reductions that there are complete sets for NEXP that are not autoreducible. We obtain the following main results:
—For any positive integers s and k such that 2s − 1 > k, there is a ≤s-Tp-complete set for NEXP that is not ≤k-ttp-autoreducible.
—For every constant c > 1, there is a ≤2-Tp-complete set for NEXP that is not autoreducible under nonadaptive reductions that make no more than three queries, such that each of them has a length between n1/c and nc, where n is input size.
—For any positive integer k, there is a ≤k-ttp-complete set for NEXP that is not autoreducible under ≤k-ttp-reductions whose truth table is not a disjunction or a negated disjunction.
Finally, we show that settling the question of whether every ≤dttp-complete set for NEXP is ≤NOR-ttp-autoreducible either positively or negatively would lead to major results about the exponential time complexity classes.
- K. Ambos-Spies. 1983. P-mitotic sets. In Logic and Machines. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, E. Börger, G. Hasenjaeger, and D. Rödding (Eds.), Vol. 171. Springer, Berlin, 1--23. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. Beigel and J. Feigenbaum. 1992. On being incoherent without being very hard. Computational Complexity 2, 1--17. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Buhrman, L. Fortnow, D. van Melkebeek, and L. Torenvliet. 2000. Separating complexity classes using autoreducibility. SIAM Journal on Computing 29, 5, 1497--1520. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Buhrman, S. Homer, and L. Torenvliet. 1991. Completeness for nondeterministic complexity classes. Mathematical Systems Theory 24, 3, 179--200.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- H. Buhrman and L. Torenvliet. 1994. On the structure of complete sets. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conference, 1994. 118--133. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SCT.1994.315811Google Scholar
- R. Downey, S. Homer, W. Gasarch, and M. Moses. 1989. On honest polynomial reductions, relativizations, and P=NP. In IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conference. IEEE Computer Society, 196--207.Google Scholar
- J. Feigenbaum and R. Beigel. 1992. On being incoherent without being very hard. Computational Complexity 2, 1--17. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Glaßer, D. Nguyen, C. Reitwießner, A. Selman, and M. Witek. 2013. Autoreducibility of complete sets for log-space and polynomial-time reductions. In ICALP (1) Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Fedor V. Fomin, Rusins Freivalds, Marta Z. Kwiatkowska, and David Peleg (Eds.), Vol. 7965. Springer, Berlin, 473--484. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Glaßer, M. Ogihara, A. Pavan, A. Selman, and L. Zhang. 2007. Autoreducibility, mitoticity, and immunity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 73, 5, 735--754. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. Homer. 1987. Minimal degrees for polynomial reducibilities. Journal of the ACM 34, 2, 480--491. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. Homer and A. Selman. 2011. Computability and Complexity Theory (2nd ed.). Springer. I--XVI, 1--298 pages. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Krajícek and P. Pudlák. 1989. Propositional proof systems, the consistency of first order theories and the complexity of computations. Journal of Symbolic Logic 54, 3, 1063--1079. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2307/2274765Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- R. Ladner, N. Lynch, and A. Selman. 1975. A comparison of polynomial time reducibilities. Theoretical Computer Science 1, 103--123.Google Scholar
- D. Nguyen and A. Selman. 2014. Non-autoreducible sets for NEXP. In STACS(LIPIcs), Ernst W. Mayr and Natacha Portier (Eds.), Vol. 25. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 590--601.Google Scholar
- B. Trahtenbrot. 1970. On autoreducibility. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 192 (1970). Translation in Soviet Math. Dokl. 11: 814--817, 1970.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Structural Properties of Nonautoreducible Sets
Recommendations
Using autoreducibility to separate complexity classes
FOCS '95: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer ScienceA language is autoreducible if it can be reduced to itself by a Turing machine that does not ask its own input to the oracle. We use autoreducibility to separate exponential space from doubly exponential space by showing that all Turing complete sets ...
Splitting NP-Complete Sets
We show that a set is m-autoreducible if and only if it is m-mitotic. This solves a long-standing open question in a surprising way. As a consequence of this unconditional result and recent work by Glaßer et al., complete sets for all of the following ...
Separating Complexity Classes Using Autoreducibility
A set is autoreducible if it can be reduced to itself by a Turing machine that does not ask its own input to the oracle. We use autoreducibility to separate the polynomial-time hierarchy from exponential space by showing that all Turing complete sets ...






Comments