Complexity of Some Problems in Universal Algebra

Extended Abstract
  • Clifford Bergman
  • Giora Slutzki
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1563)

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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    C. Bergman, D. Juedes, and G. Slutzki, Computational complexity of term-equivalence, Inter. Jour. Algebra and Computation (1997), to appear.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Burris, Computers and universal algebra: some directions, Algebra Universalis 34 (1995), 61–71.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    S. Burris and H. P. Sankappanavar, A course in universal algebra, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [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. [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. [6]
    H. Friedman, Function composition and intractability I, manuscript, March 1982.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    G. Grätzer, Universal algebra, second ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [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. [9]
    J. Kalicki, On comparison of finite algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1952), 36–40.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. [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. [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. [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. [13]
    R. McKenzie, G. McNulty, and W. Taylor, Algebras, lattices, varieties, vol. I, Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA, 1987.MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [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. [15]
    W. Taylor, Equational logic, Houston Jour. Math. (1979), iii+83, survey.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    J. Wing, A specifier’s introduction to formal methods, Computer (1990), 8–24.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clifford Bergman
    • 1
  • Giora Slutzki
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsIowa State UniversityAmes
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceIowa State UniversityAmes

Personalised recommendations