Advertisement

A theory of strict P-completeness

  • Anne Condon
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 577)

Abstract

A serious limitation of the theory of P-completeness is that it fails to distinguish between those P-complete problems that do have polynomial speedup on parallel machines from those that don't. We introduce the notion of strict P-completeness and develop tools to prove precise limits on the possible speedup obtainable for a number of P-complete problems.

Keywords

Parallel Algorithm Parallel Machine Markov Decision Process Polynomial Number Order Depth 
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.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Anderson, R., E. Mayr and M. Warmuth. Parallel Approximation Schemes for Bin Packing, Information and Computation, 82(3):262–277, 1989.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Cook, S. A. and R. A. Reckhow. Time bounded random access machines, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 7(4):354–375, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Cook, S. A. A taxonomy of problems with fast parallel algorithms, Information and Control, 64(1–3):2–22, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Dwork, C., P. C. Kanellakis and J. C. Mitchell. On the sequential nature of unification, Journal on Logic Programming, 1:35–50, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Fortune, S. and J. Wyllie, Parallelism in random access machines. In 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 114–118, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Goldschlager, L. M. The monotone and planar circuit value problems are log space complete for P, SIGACT News, 9(2):25–29, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Greenlaw, R., H. J. Hoover and W. L. Ruzzo. A Compendium of Problems Complete for P, Department of Computing Science University of Alberta Technical Report TR 90-36, March 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Howard, R. A., Dynamic Programming and Markov Processes, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1960.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Karp, R. M. and V. Ramachandran. A Survey of Parallel Algorithms for Shared-Memory Machines, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Kruskal, C. P., L. Rudolph and M. Snir. A complexity theory of efficient parallel algorithms, Theoretical Computer Science, 71(1):95–132.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Ladner, R. E., The circuit value problem is log space complete for P. SIGACT News, 7(1):18–20, 1975.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Papadimitriou, C. H. and J. N. Tsitsiklis. The complexity of Markov decision processes, Mathematics of Operations Research, 12(3):441–450, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Reif, J. Depth first search is inherently sequential, Information Processing Letters, 20(5):229–234, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Simons and Vitter. New classes for parallel complexity: a study of Unification and Other Complete Problems for P. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 35(5):403–418, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Slot, C. and P. Van Emde Boas. The problem of space invariance for sequential machines, Information and Computation, 77::93–122, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Snyder, L. Type architectures, shared memory, and the corollary of modest potential, Annual Review of Computer Science 1:289–317, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Stockmeyer, L. and U. Vishkin. Simulation of Parallel Random Access Machines by Circuits, SIAM Journal on Computing, 14:862–874, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Condon
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of Wisconsin at MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations