The complexity of generating and checking proofs of membership
Can one compute satisfying assignments for satisfiable Boolean formulas in polynomial time with parallel queries to NP?
Is the unique optimal clique problem (UOCLIQUE) complete for PNP[O(log n)]?
Is the unique satisfiability problem (USAT) NP hard? We define a framework that enables us to study the complexity of generating and checking proofs of membership. We connect the above three questions to the complexity of generating and checking proofs of membership for sets in NP and PNP[O(log n)]. We show that an affirmative answer to any of the three questions implies the existence of coNP checkable proofs for PNP[O(log n)] that can be generated in FP ∥ NP . Furthermore, we construct an oracle relative to which there do not exist coNP checkable proofs for NP that are generated in FP ∥ NP . It follows that relative to this oracle all of the above questions are answered negatively.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [BDG-I&II]J. Balcázar, J. Díaz, and J. Gabarró. Structural Complexity I & II. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science, Springer-Verlag (1988, 1991)Google Scholar
- [Be88]Beigel, R.: NP-hard sets are P-superterse unless R=NP. Technical Report 88-04, Dept. of Computer Science, The John Hopkins University (1988).Google Scholar
- [BKT94]Buhrman, H., Kadin, J., Thierauf, T.: On functions computable with nonadaptive queries to NP. Proc. 9th Structure in Complexity Theory Conference (1994) 43–52Google Scholar
- [Co71]Cook, S.: The Complexity of Theorem-Proving Procedures. Proc. 3rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1971) 151–158Google Scholar
- [CT93]Chen, Z., Toda, S.: An Exact Characterization of FP ∥NP. Manuscript (1993)Google Scholar
- [FHOS93]Fenner, S., Homer, S., Ogiwara, M., Selman, A.: On Using Oracles That Compute values. 10-th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, Springer Verlag LNCS 665 (1993) 398–407Google Scholar
- [Fo94]Fortnow, L.: Personal Communication. In the plane to Madras (India) (December 7, 1994)Google Scholar
- [HNOS94]Hemaspaandra, L., Naik, A., Ogihara, M., Selman, A.: Finding Satisfying Assignments Uniquely Isn't so Easy: Unique Solutions Collapes the Polynomial Hierarchy. Algorithms and Compuatation, International Symposium ISAAC '94, Springer Verlag LNCS 834 (1994) 56–64Google Scholar
- [HU79]Hopcroft, J., Ullman, J.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley (1979)Google Scholar
- [IT89]Impagliazzo, R., Tardos, G.: Decision Versus Search Problems in Super-Polynomial Time. Proc. 30th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (1989) 222–227Google Scholar
- [Ka88]Kadin, J.: Restricted Turing Reducibilities and the Structure of the Polynomial Time Hierarchy. PhD thesis, Cornell University (1988)Google Scholar
- [Kr86]Krentel, M.: The Complexity of Optimization Problems. Proc. 18th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1986) 69–76Google Scholar
- [Le73]Levin, L.: Universal Sorting Problems. Problems of Information Transmission 9 (1973) 265–266Google Scholar
- [Og95]Ogihara, M.: Functions Computable with Limited Access to NP. Technical Report 538, University of Rochester (1995)Google Scholar
- [PZ83]Papadimitriou, C., Zachos, D.: Two remarks on the power of counting. 6th GI Conference on TCS, Springer Verlag LNCS 145 (1983) 269–276Google Scholar
- [Se94]Selman, A.: A taxonomy of complexity classes of functions. Journal of Computer and System Science 48 (1994) 357–381.Google Scholar
- [To91]Toda, S.: On polynomial-time truth-table reducibilities of intractable sets to P-selective sets. Mathematical Systems Theory 24 (1991) 69–82.Google Scholar
- [W86]Wagner, K.: More complicated questions about maxima and minima and some closure properties of NP. Proc. 13th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP), Springer Verlag LNCS 226 (1986) 53–80Google Scholar