Kolmogorov complexity, restricted nondeterminism and generalized spectra

  • Deborah Joseph
  • Meera Sitharam
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 415)


This paper uses the technique of generalized spectra and expressibility of complexity classes in logic, developed by Fagin and Immerman, to give alternate characterizations of specific subclasses of NP. These characterizations serve to unify concepts that appear in seemingly different areas of complexity theory; namely, the restricted nondeterminism of Kintala and Fischer and the time bounded Kolmogorov complexity of Daley and Ko. As consequences of these characterizations we show that relatively easy subsets of NP−P can not be pseudorandomly generated, unless UTIME[t(n)]=DTIME[t(n)] for certain exponential functions t. Secondly, we show that no easy subset of the set of all satisfying assignments of satisfiable g(n)-easy formulas contains an assignment for each of these formulas, unless NEXPTIME = EXPTIME. The latter partially answers a question raised by Hartmanis.


Kolmogorov Complexity Satisfying Assignment Pseudorandom Generator Generalize Spectrum Implicit Definition 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

6. Bibliography

  1. [Al 88]
    E.W. Allender, “Some consequences of the existence of pseudorandom generators,” to appear, JCSS.Google Scholar
  2. [ADT 89]
    C. Àlvarez, J. Diaz, J. Torán, “Complexity classes with complete problems between P and NP-C,” Fund. Comput. Theory conference, Lecture notes in computer science, 380, Springer-Verlag, pp. 13–24, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. [Ba 68]
    Y.M. Barzdin, “Complexity of programs to determine whether natural numbers not greater than n belong to a recursively enumerable set,” Soviet Math. Dokl. 9, pp. 1251–1254, 1968.Google Scholar
  4. [Da 77]
    R.P. Daley, “On the inference of optimal descriptions,” Theoretical Comp. Sci. 4, pp. 301–309, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Fa 74]
    R. Fagin, “Generalized first order spectra and polynomial time recognizable sets,” Complexity of computation, AMS, Providence, pp. 44–73, 1974.Google Scholar
  6. [Fa 75]
    R. Fagin, “Monadic generalized spectra,” Z. Math. Logic Grundlagen Math. 21, pp. 89–96, 1975.Google Scholar
  7. [Gu 84]
    Y. Gurevich, “Toward logic tailored for computational complexity,” Computation and Proof Theory, Lecture notes in mathematics 1104, Springer-Verlag, pp. 175–216, 1984.Google Scholar
  8. [Ha 83]
    J. Hartmanis, “Generalized Kolmogorov complexity and the structure of feasible computations,” IEEE FOCS, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. [HaYe 83]
    J. Hartmanis, “Computation times of NP sets of different densities,” ICALP, Lecture notes in computer science 154, Springer-Verlag pp. 319–330, 1983.Google Scholar
  10. [Im 82]
    N. Immerman, “Upper and lower bounds for first order expressibility,” J. of Computer and System Sciences 22, no.3, 1982.Google Scholar
  11. [Im 87]
    N. Immerman, “Expressibility as a complexity measure: results and directions,” Structure in complexity theory conf., 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [KiFi 80]
    C.M.R. Kintala, P. Fischer, “Refining nondeterminism in relativized polynomial time bounded computations,” SIAM J. Comput. 9, no. 1, 1980.Google Scholar
  13. [Ko 83]
    K-I. Ko, “Resource bounded program size complexity and pseudorandom sequences,” Dept. of comp. sci., University of Houston, 1983.Google Scholar
  14. [Kol 89]
    P.G. Kolaitis, “Implicit definability on finite structures and unambiguous computations,” Manuscript, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. [Le 73]
    L.A. Levin, “Universal search problems,” Problems in Information Transmission 9, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. [LiVi 88]
    M. Li, P.M.B. Vitanyi, “Two decades of applied Kolmogorov complexity,” Structure in complexity theory conf., 1973.Google Scholar
  17. [Lo 86]
    L. Longpré, “Resource bounded Kolmogorov complexity, a link between complexity theory and information theory,” Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Computer Sciences, Cornell Univ., 1986.Google Scholar
  18. [Ly 82]
    J.F. Lynch, “Complexity classes and theories of finite models,” Math. Systems Theory 15, pp.127–144, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [NiWi 88]
    N. Nisan, A. Widgerson, “Hardness vs. randomness,” IEEE FOCS, pp.2–24, 1988.Google Scholar
  20. [PaYa 88]
    C. Papadimitriou, M. Yannakakis, “Optimization, approximation, and complexity classes,” ACM STOC, pp.229–234, 1988.Google Scholar
  21. [StHu 86]
    R.E. Stearns, H.B. Hunt, “On the complexity of the satisfiability problem and the structure of NP,” TR 86-21, SUNY Albany, 1986.Google Scholar
  22. [Ya 82]
    A. Yao, “Theory and applications of trapdoor functions,” IEEE FOCS, pp.80–91, 1982.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deborah Joseph
    • 1
  • Meera Sitharam
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Sciences DepartmentUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations