solutions4 - Solutions 4 Question 1 Find the error in the...

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: Solutions 4 Question 1 Find the error in the proof. In the fifth sentence of the proof (Because every ...) it is argued that as (1) SAT TIME[ n k ], and (2) every language in NP is reducible in polynomial time to SAT, we can conclude that NP TIME[ n k ], that is, that every language L in NP is in TIME[ n k ] (in other words, there is an O ( n k ) algorithm to decide L ). Whilst (1) is correct (if we accept the assumption that P = NP) and (2) is also true, they do not support this conclusion. (1) tells us that there is an O ( n k ) algorithm for SAT. (2) tells us that for any L NP , for some j , there is an O ( n j ) algorithm to reduce L to SAT. So to decide L , we can combine the reduction to SAT with the algorithm for SAT; the total running time is O ( n j + n k ). If j > k , then all we know is that L TIME[ n j ]; a weaker conclusion than L TIME[ n k ]. Question 2 Are there any problems in P that are complete with respect to linear time reductions? No, there cannot be a language that is P-complete with respect to linear reductions. We use proof by contradiction....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/29/2012 for the course ECE 345 taught by Professor Veneris during the Fall '10 term at University of Toronto- Toronto.

Page1 / 2

solutions4 - Solutions 4 Question 1 Find the error in the...

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