Extended locally definable acceptance types

Extended abstract
  • Rolf Niedermeier
  • Peter Rossmanith
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 665)


Hertrampf's locally definable acceptance types showed that many complexity classes can be defined in terms of polynomially time bounded NTM's with simple local conditions on the nodes of its computation tree, rather than global concepts like number of accepting paths etc. We introduce extended locally definable acceptance types as an extension of Hertrampf's work with respect to the number of characterizable complexity classes. Among the new characterizable classes are UP and MODZkP. It is shown how different types of oracle access, e.g. guarded access, can be characterized by this model. This sheds new light on the discussion on how to access unambiguous computation. We present simple functions that describe precisely objects of current research as the unambiguous oracle, alternation, and promise hierarchies. We exhibit the new class UAP which seems to be an unambiguous analogue of Wagner's ∇P.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. Beigel, J. Gill, and U. Hertrampf. Counting classes: Threshold, parity, mods, and fewness. In Proc. of 7th STACS, number 415 in LNCS, pages 49–57. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Buntrock, L. A. Hemachandra, and D. Siefkes. Using inductive counting to simulate nondeterministic computation. In Proc. of 15th MFCS, number 452 in LNCS, pages 187–194. Springer, 1990. (to appear in Information and Computation).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.-Y. Cai, L. Hemachandra, and J. Vyskoč. Promise problems and access to unambiguous computation. In Proc. of 17th MFCS, number 629 in LNCS, pages 162–171. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Even, A. Selman, and Y. Yacobi. The complexity of promise problems with applications to public-key cryptography. Inform. and Control, 61(2):159–173, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. A. Fenner, L. J. Fortnow, and S. A. Kurtz. Gap-definable counting classes. In Proc. of 6th Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 30–42, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Goldschlager and I. Parberry. On the construction of parallel computers from various bases of boolean functions. Theoretical Comput. Sci., 43:43–58, 1986.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Grollmann and A. Selman. Complexity measures for public-key cryptosystems. SIAM J. Comput., 17:309–335, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    U. Hertrampf. Locally definable acceptance types—the three valued case. In Proc. of LATIN'92, number 583 in LNCS, pages 262–271. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    U. Hertrampf. Locally definable acceptance types for polynomial time machines. In Proc. of 9th STACS, number 577 in LNCS, pages 199–207. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K.-J. Lange. Unambiguity of circuits. In Proc. of 5th Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 130–137, 1990. (to appear in TCS).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K.-J. Lange and P. Rossmanith. Characterizing unambiguous augmented pushdown automata by circuits. In Proc. of 15th MFCS, number 452 in LNCS, pages 399–406. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Niedermeier and P. Rossmanith. Unambiguous simulations of auxiliary pushdown automata and circuits. In Proc. of LATIN'92, number 583 in LNCS, pages 387–400. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. L. Selman. A survey of one-way functions in complexity theory. Mathematical Systems Theory, 25(3):203–221, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Valiant. The relative complexity of checking and evaluating. Inform. Proc. Letters, 5:20–23, 1976.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    K. W. Wagner. Alternating machines using partially defined “AND” and “OR”. Technical Report 39, Institut für Informatik, Universität Würzburg, Jan. 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf Niedermeier
    • 1
  • Peter Rossmanith
    • 1
  1. 1.Fakultät für InformatikTechnische Universität MünchenMünchen 2Fed. Rep. of Germany

Personalised recommendations