Splittings, robustness and structure of complete sets

  • Harry Buhrman
  • Albrecht Hoene
  • Leen Torenvliet
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 665)


We investigate the structure of EXP and NEXP complete and hard sets under various kinds of reductions. In particular, we are interested in the way in which information that makes the set complete is stored in te set. To address this question for a given set A, we construct a sparse set S, and ask whether A−S is still hard. It turns out, that for most of the reductions considered and for an arbitrary given sparseness condition, there is a single subexponential time computable set S that meets this condition, such that A−S is not hard for any A. On the other hand we show that for any polynomial time computable sparse set 5, the set A−S remains hard. In the second part of the paper we address the question whether the information that is evidently abundantly present can be used to produce two disjoint complete sets from a single complete set A, i.e. the question whether exponential-time complete sets are milotic. It turns out that the many-one complete sets are, yet there is strong evidence that other complete sets may not be. In particular we show the existence of a 3-tt complete set that can not be split into two many-one complete sets. Finally we show a complexity theoretic counterpart to Sacks' splitting theorem, i.e. we show that any many-one complete set for EXP can be split into two incomplete sets.


Polynomial Time Truth Table Exponential Time Splitting Theorem Turing Reduction 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [AS84a]
    K. Ambos-Spies. On the structure of polynomial time degrees. In M. Fontet and K. Mehlhorn, editors, STACS 84, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 166, pages 198–208. Springer-Verlag, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. [AS84b]
    K. Ambos-Spies. P-mitotic sets. In E. Börger, G. Hasenjäger, and D. Roding, editors, Logic and Machines, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 177, pages 1–23. Springer-Verlag, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. [BDG88]
    J. Balcázar, J. Díaz, and J. Gabarró. Structural Complexity I. Springer-Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. [Ber76]
    L. Berman. On the structure of complete sets: Almost everywhere complexity and infinitely often speedup. Proc. 17th IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Computing, pages 76–80, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. [Ber77]
    L. Berman. Polynomial Reducibilities and Complete Sets. PhD thesis, Cornell University, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. [BH77]
    L. Berman and H. Hartmanis. On isomorphisms and density of NP and other complete sets. SIAM J. Comput., 6:305–322, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. [BHT91]
    H. Buhrman, S. Homer, and L. Torenvliet. On complete sets for nondeterministic classes. Math. Systems Theory, 24:179–200, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [Brc78]
    S. Breidbart. On splitting recursive sets. J. Comput. System Sci., 17:56–64, 1978.Google Scholar
  9. [BST91]
    H. Buhrman, B. Spaan, and L. Torenvliet. Bounded reductions. In C. Chofrut and M. Jantzen, editors, STACS 1991, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 480, pages 410–421, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. [GH89]
    K. Ganesan and S. Homer. Complete problems and strong polynomial reducibilities. In B. Monien and R. Cori, editors, STACS 89, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 349, pages 240–250, 1989.Google Scholar
  11. [Har78]
    J. Hartmanis. On the logtape isomorphism of complete sets. Theoretical Computer Science, 7:273–286, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. [Jon75]
    N. Jones. Space bounded reducibilities among combinatorial problems. J. Comput. System Sci., 11:68–85, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. [Kar72]
    R. Karp. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In R. Miller and J. Thatcher, editors, Complexity of Computer Computations, pages 85–103. Plenum Press, New York, 1972.Google Scholar
  14. [Lad73]
    R.E. Ladner. Mitotic recursively enumerable sets. J. Symbolic Logic, 38(2):199–211, 1973.Google Scholar
  15. [Lad75]
    R. Ladner. On the structure of polynomial time reducibility. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 22:155–171, 1975.Google Scholar
  16. [LLS75]
    R. Ladner, N. Lynch, and A. Selman. A comparison of polynomial time reducibilities. Theor. Comput. Sci., 1:103–123, 1975.Google Scholar
  17. [Owi75]
    J.C. Owings. Splitting a context-sensitive set. J. Computer and System Sciences, 10:83–87, 1975.Google Scholar
  18. [Sac63]
    G.E. Sacks. On degrees less than 0′. Ann. of Math., 2(77):211–231, 1963.Google Scholar
  19. [Sch86]
    U. Schöning. Complete sets and closeness to complexity classes. Math. Systems Theory, 19:24–41, 1986.Google Scholar
  20. [TFL91]
    S. Tang, B. Fu, and T. Liu. Exponential time and subexponential time sets. In Proc. Structure in Complexity Theory sixth annual conference, pages 230–237, 1991.Google Scholar
  21. [Wag86]
    K. Wagner. More complicated questions about maxima and minima and some closures of NP. In 13th ICALP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 226, pages 434–443, 1986.Google Scholar
  22. [Wat87]
    O. Watanabe. A comparison of polynomial time completeness notions. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 54:249–265, 1987.Google Scholar
  23. [Wil85]
    C.B. Wilson. Relativized circuit complexity. J. Computer and System Sciences, 31:169–181, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harry Buhrman
    • 1
  • Albrecht Hoene
    • 2
  • Leen Torenvliet
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of AmsterdamTV AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceTechnische Universität BerlinBerlin 10Germany

Personalised recommendations