State Complexity Characterizations of Parameterized Degree-Bounded Graph Connectivity, Sub-Linear Space Computation, and the Linear Space Hypothesis

  • Tomoyuki YamakamiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10952)


The linear space hypothesis is a practical working hypothesis, which originally states the insolvability of a restricted 2CNF Boolean formula satisfiability problem parameterized by the number of Boolean variables. From this hypothesis, it follows that the degree-3 directed graph connectivity problem (3DSTCON) parameterized by the number of vertices in a given graph cannot belong to PsubLIN, composed of decision problems computable by polynomial-time, sub-linear-space deterministic Turing machines. This hypothesis immediately implies L\(\ne \)NL and it was used as a solid foundation to obtain new lower bounds on the computational complexity of various NL search and NL optimization problems. The state complexity of transformation refers to the cost of converting one type of finite automata to another type, where the cost is measured in terms of the increase of the number of inner states of the converted automata from that of the original automata. We relate the linear space hypothesis to the state complexity of transforming restricted 2-way nondeterministic finite automata to computationally equivalent 2-way alternating finite automata having narrow computation graphs. For this purpose, we present state complexity characterizations of 3DSTCON and PsubLIN. We further characterize a non-uniform version of the linear space hypothesis in terms of the state complexity of transformation.


  1. 1.
    Allender, E., Chen, S., Lou, T., Papakonstantinou, P.A., Tang, B.: Width-parameterized SAT: time-space tradeoffs. Theory Comput. 10, 297–339 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnes, G., Buss, J.F., Ruzzo, W.L., Schieber, B.: A sublinear space, polynomial time algorithm for directed s-t connectivity. SIAM J. Comput. 27, 1273–1282 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berman, P., Lingas, A.: On complexity of regular languages in terms of finite automata. Report 304, Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Science, Warsaw (1977)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakraborty, D., Tewari, R.: Simultaneous time-space upper bounds for red-blue path problem in planar DAGs. In: Rahman, M.S., Tomita, E. (eds.) WALCOM 2015. LNCS, vol. 8973, pp. 258–269. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geffert, V., Mereghetti, C., Pighizzini, G.: Converting two-way nondeterministic automata into simpler automata. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 295, 189–203 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Geffert, V., Pighizzini, G.: Two-way unary automata versus logarithmic space. Inform. Comput. 209, 1016–1025 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kapoutsis, C.A.: Minicomplexity. J. Automat. Lang. Combin. 17, 205–224 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kapoutsis, C.A.: Two-way automata versus logarithmic space. Theory Comput. Syst. 55, 421–447 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kapoutsis, C.A., Pighizzini, G.: Two-way automata characterizations of L/poly versus NL. Theory Comput. Syst. 56, 662–685 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sakoda, W.J., Sipser, M.: Nondeterminism and the size of two-way finite automata. In: STOC 1978, pp. 275–286 (1978)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yamakami, T.: The 2CNF Boolean formula satsifiability problem and the linear space hypothesis. In: MFCS 2017, LIPIcs, vol. 83, pp. 62:1–62:14 (2017). arXiv:1709.10453
  12. 12.
    Yamakami, T.: Parameterized graph connectivity and polynomial-time sub-linear-space short reductions (preliminary report). In: Hague, M., Potapov, I. (eds.) RP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10506, pp. 176–191. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of FukuiFukuiJapan

Personalised recommendations