lecture18 - Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated: October, 2011 Lecture 18 Jonathan Katz 1 The Power of IP We have seen a (surprising!) interactive proof for graph non-isomorphism. This begs the question: how powerful is IP ? 1.1 co NP ⊆ IP As a “warm-up” we show that co NP ⊆ IP . We have seen last time that co NP is unlikely to have a constant-round interactive proof system (since this would imply 1 that the polynomial hierarchy collapses). For this reason it was conjectured at one point that IP was not “too much more powerful” than NP . Here, however, we show this intuition wrong: any language in co NP has a proof system using a linear number of rounds. We begin by arithmetizing a 3CNF formula φ to obtain a polynomial expression that evaluates to 0 iff φ has no satisfying assignments. (This powerful technique, by which a “combinatorial” statement about satisfiability of a formula is mapped to an algebraic statement about a polynomial, will come up again later in the course.) We then show how to give an interactive proof demonstrating that the expression indeed evaluates to 0. To arithmetize φ , the prover and verifier proceed as follows: identify 0 with “false” and positive integers with “true.” The literal x i becomes the variable x i , and the literal ¯ x i becomes (1- x i ). We replace “ ∧ ” by multiplication, and “ ∨ ” by addition. Let Φ denote the polynomial that results from this arithmetization; note that this is an n-variate polynomial in the variables x 1 ,...,x n , whose total degree is at most the number of clauses in φ . Now consider what happens when the { x i } are assigned boolean values: all literals take the value 1 if they evaluate to “true,” and 0 if they evaluate to “false.” Any clause (which is a disjunction of literals) takes a positive value iff at least one of its literals is true; thus, a clause takes a positive value iff it evaluates to “true.” Finally, note that Φ itself (which is a conjunction of clauses) takes on a positive value iff all of its constituent clauses are positive. We can summarize this as: Φ( x 1 ,...,x n ) > 0 if φ ( x 1 ,...,x n ) = true , and Φ( x 1 ,...,x n ) = 0 if φ ( x 1 ,...,x n ) = false . Summing over all possible (boolean) settings to the variables, we see that φ ∈ SAT ⇔ X x 1 ∈{ , 1 } ··· X x n ∈{ , 1 } Φ( x 1 ,...,x n ) = 0 ....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/13/2012 for the course CMSC 652 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '08 term at Maryland.

Page1 / 4

lecture18 - Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online