# Complexity of Some Problems in Universal Algebra

Extended Abstract

Conference paper

First Online:

## Abstract

In this paper we consider the complexity of several problems involving finite algebraic structures. Given finite universal algebras **A** and **B**, these problems ask: (1) Do **A** and **B** satisfy precisely the same identities? (2) Do they satisfy the same quasi-identities? and (3) Do **A** and **B** have the same set of term operations?

In addition to the general case in which we allow arbitrary (finite) algebras, we consider each of these problems under the restrictions that all operations are unary, and that **A** and **B** have cardinality two. We briefly discuss the relationship of these problems to algebraic specification theory.

## Keywords

Unary Algebra Universal Algebra Isomorphism Problem Term Operation Operation Symbol
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- [1]C. Bergman, D. Juedes, and G. Slutzki,
*Computational complexity of term-equivalence*, Inter. Jour. Algebra and Computation (1997), to appear.Google Scholar - [2]S. Burris,
*Computers and universal algebra: some directions*, Algebra Universalis**34**(1995), 61–71.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [3]S. Burris and H. P. Sankappanavar,
*A course in universal algebra*, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.MATHGoogle Scholar - [4]H. Ehrig and B. Mahr,
*Fundamentals of algebraic specification 1*, Vol. 6 of EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science [5], 1985, Equations and initial semantics.Google Scholar - [5]H. Ehrig and B. Mahr,
*Fundamentals of algebraic specification 2*, EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 21, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990, Module specifications and constraints.Google Scholar - [6]H. Friedman,
*Function composition and intractability I*, manuscript, March 1982.Google Scholar - [7]G. Grätzer,
*Universal algebra*, second ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.MATHGoogle Scholar - [8]D. Johnson,
*A catalog of complexity classes*, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science (J. van Leeuwen, ed.), vol. A, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990, pp. 69–161.Google Scholar - [9]J. Kalicki,
*On comparison of finite algebras*, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.**3**(1952), 36–40.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [10]D. Kozen,
*Complexity of finitely presented algebras*, Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Symposium on the Theory of Computing, ACM, 1977, pp. 164–177.Google Scholar - [11]D. Kozen,
*Lower bounds for natural proof systems*, 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Providence, R.I., 1977), IEEE Comput. Soc., Long Beach,CA, 1977, pp. 254–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [12]L. Kučera and V. Trnková,
*The computational complexity of some problems in universal algebra*, Universal Algebra and its Links with Logic, Algebra, Combinatorics and Computer Science (P. Burmeister et.al., ed.), Heldermann Verlag, 1984, pp. 261–289.Google Scholar - [13]R. McKenzie, G. McNulty, and W. Taylor,
*Algebras, lattices, varieties*, vol. I, Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA, 1987.MATHGoogle Scholar - [14]W. J. Savitch,
*Relationships between nondeterministic and deterministic tape complexities*, J. Computer and Systems Sciences**4**(1970), no. 2, 177–192.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [15]W. Taylor,
*Equational logic*, Houston Jour. Math. (1979), iii+83, survey.Google Scholar - [16]J. Wing,
*A specifier’s introduction to formal methods*, Computer (1990), 8–24.Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999