Advertisement

Universal quantifiers and time complexity of random access machines

  • E. Grandjean
Section V: Spektralproblem
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 171)

Abstract

Let Sp(d∨) denote the class of spectra of first-order sentences with d universal quantifiers. Let NRAM(T(n)) denote the class of sets (of positive integers) accepted by Nondeterministic Random Access Machines (with successor as the only arithmetical operation), in time O(T(n)) where n is the input integer. We prove Sp(d∨) = NRAM(nd) for d≥2.

A similar result holds for generalized spectra.

Keywords

Turing Machine Function Symbol Universal Quantifier Relation Symbol Generalize Spectrum 
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]
    A.V. Aho, J.E. Hopcroft and J.D. Ullman, The design and analysis of computer algorithms, Addison-Wesley, Reading (1974).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S.A. Cook, A hierarchy for nondeterministic time complexity, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 7 (1973), pp. 343–353.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    S.A. Cook and R.A. Reckhow, Time bounded Random Access Machines, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 7 (1973), pp. 354–375.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Fagin, Generalized first-order spectra and polynomial-time recognizable sets, Complexity of computations, R.M. Karp ed., Amer. Math. Soc., Providence (1974), pp. 43–73.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    R. Fagin, A spectrum hierarchy, Z. Math. Logik. Grundlag. Math. 21 (1975), pp. 123–134.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    E. Grandjean, The spectra of first-order sentences and computational complexity, to appear in SIAM J. Comput.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    N. Immerman, Number of quantifiers is better than number of tape cells, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 22 (1981), pp. 384–406.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    N. Immerman, Upper and lower bounds for first-order expressibility, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 25, 1 (1982).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    N. Immerman, Languages which capture complexity classes, 15th ACM SIGACT Symp. (1983), pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    N.D. Jones and A.L. Selman, Turing machines and the spectra of first-order formulas with equality, J. Symb. Logic 39 (1974), pp. 139–150.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    H.R. Lewis, Complexity results for classes of quantificational formulas, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 21 (1980), pp. 317–353.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    L. Lovász and P. Gács, Some remarks on generalized spectra, Z. Math. Logik. Grundlag. Math. 23 (1977), pp. 547–553.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.F. Lynch, Complexity classes and theories of finite models, Math. Systems Theory 15 (1982), pp. 127–144.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    B. Monien, Characterizations of time-bounded computations by limited primitive recursion, 2nd Int. Colloq. Automata Languages Programming, Springer, Berlin (1974), pp. 280–293.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. Monien, About the derivation languages of grammars and machines, 4th Int. Colloq. Automata Languages Programming (1977), pp. 337–351.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    P. Pudlák, The observational predicate calculus and complexity of computations, Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin. 16 (1975), pp. 395–398.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Schönhage, Storage Modification Machines, SIAM J. Comput. 9 (1980), pp. 490–508.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J.I. Seiferas, M.J. Fisher and A.R. Meyer, Separating nondeterministic time complexity classes, J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 25 (1978), pp. 146–167.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    R. Weicker, Turing machines with associative memory access, 2nd Int. Colloq. Automata Languages Programming (1974), pp. 458–472.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Grandjean
    • 1
  1. 1.Université Lyon 1Villeurbanne cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations