Advertisement

On the complexity of unification and disunification in commutative idempotent semigroups

  • Miki Hermann
  • Phokion G. Kolaitis
Session 5a
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1330)

Abstract

We analyze the computational complexity of elementary unification and disunification problems for the equational theory ACI of commutative idempotent semigroups. From earlier work, it was known that the decision problem for elementary ACI-unification is solvable in polynomial time. We show that this problem is inherently sequential by establishing that it is complete for polynomial time (P-complete) via logarithmic-space reductions. We also investigate the decision problem and the counting problem for elementary ACI-matching and observe that the former is solvable in logarithmic space, but the latter is #P-complete. After this, we analyze the computational complexity of the decision problem for elementary ground ACI-disunification. Finally, we study the computational complexity of a restricted version of elementary ACI-matching, which arises naturally as a set-term matching problem in the context of the logic data language LDL. In both cases, we delineate the boundary between polynomial-time solvability and NP-hardness by taking into account two parameters, the number of free constants and the number of disequations or equations.

Keywords

Polynomial Time Decision Problem Equational Theory Truth Assignment Horn Clause 
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. [AGS96]
    N. Arni, S. Greco, and D. Saccá. Matching of bounded set terms in the logic language LDL++. J. Logic Prog., 27(1):73–87, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [BB88]
    F. Baader and W. Büttner. Unification in commutative idempotent monoids. Theoretical Comp. Sci., 56(3):345–353, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. [BKN87]
    D. Benanav, D. Kapur, and P. Narendran. Complexity of matching problems. J. Symb. Comp., 3:203–216, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [Coo74]
    S.A. Cook. An observation on time-storage trade off. J. of Comp. and System Sci., 9(3):308–316, 1974.Google Scholar
  5. [DG84]
    W.F. Dowling and J.H. Gallier. Linear-time algorithms for testing the satis fiability of propositional Horn formulae. J. Logic Prog., 1(3):267–284, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. [DKM84]
    C. Dwork, P.C. Kanellakis, and J.C. Mitchell. On the sequential nature of unification. J. Logic Prog., 1:35–50, 1984.Google Scholar
  7. [GHR95]
    R. Greenlaw, H.J. Hoover, and W.L. Ruzzo. Limits to parallel computation: P-completeness theory. Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. [GJ79]
    M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson. Computers and intractability: A guide to the theory of NP-completeness. W.H. Freeman and Co, 1979.Google Scholar
  9. [HK95a]
    M. Hermann and P.G. Kolaitis. The complexity of counting problems in equational matching. J. Symb. Comp., 20(3):343–362, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. [HK95b]
    M. Hermann and P.G. Kolaitis. Computational complexity of simultaneous elementary matching problems. In J. Wiedermann and P. Hájek, eds, Proc. 20th MFCS, Prague (Czech Republic), LNCS 969, pp 359–370. Springer, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [JL76]
    N.D. Jones and W.T. Laaser. Complete problems for deterministic polynomial time. Theoretical Comp. Sci., 3(1):105–117, 1976.Google Scholar
  12. [Joh90]
    D.S. Johnson. A catalog of complexity classes. In J. van Leeuwen, ed, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A, chapter 2, pp 67–161. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. [KN86]
    D. Kapur and P. Narendran. NP-completeness of the set unification and matching problems. In J.H. Siekmann, ed, Proc. 8th CADE, Oxford (England), LNCS 230, pp 489–495. Springer, 1986.Google Scholar
  14. [KN92]
    D. Kapur and P. Narendran Complexity of unification problems with associative-commutative operators. J. of Autom. Reasoning, 9:261–288, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. [Nar96]
    P. Narendran. Unification modulo ACI+1+0. Fundamenta Informaticac, 25(1):49–57, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. [Pap94]
    C.H. Papadimitriou. Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. [Pla84]
    D.A. Plaisted. Complete problems in the first-order predicate calculus. J. of Comp. and System Sci., 29(1):8–35, 1984.Google Scholar
  18. [STZ92]
    O. Shmueli, S. Tsur, and C. Zaniolo. Compilation of set terms in the logic data language (LDL). J. Logic Prog., 12(1 & 2):89–119, 1992.Google Scholar
  19. [Va179a]
    L.G. Valiant. The complexity of computing the permanent. Theoretical Comp. Sci., 8:189–201, 1979.Google Scholar
  20. [Va179b]
    L.G. Valiant. The complexity of enumeration and reliability problems. SIAM J. on Comp., 8(3):410–421, 1979.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miki Hermann
    • 1
  • Phokion G. Kolaitis
    • 2
  1. 1.LORIA (CNRS)Vandceuvre-lés-NancyFrance
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of CaliforniaSanta CruzU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations