• Mitsunori Ogiwara
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 775)


It is shown for any k≥1, that the closure of NP under NCk reducibility coincides with that of NP under ACk−1 reducibility, thereby giving an answer to a basic question that has been open for a long time. A similar result is shown for C=P.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    E. Allender and C. Wilson. Width-bounded reducibility and binary search over complexity classes. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 122–129. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Alvarez, J. Balcazar, and B. Jenner. Functional oracle queries as a measure of parallel time. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 422–433. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science #480, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Borodin. On relating time and space to size and depth. SIAM Journal on Computing, 6(4):733–744, December 1977.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    S. Buss and L. Hay. On truth-table reducibility to SAT and the difference hierarchy over NP. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 224–233. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Castro and C. Seara. Characterizations of some complexity classes between θ2/p and δ2/p. In Proceedings of the 9th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 305–317. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science #577, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Chandra, L. Stockmeyer, and U. Vishkin. Constant depth reducibility. SIAM Journal on Computing, 13(2):423–439, May 1984.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S. Cook. The complexity of theorem proving procedures. In Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 151–158. ACM Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S. Cook. A taxonomy of problems with fast parallel algorithms. Information and Computation, 64:2–22, 1985.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Furst, J. Saxe, and M. Sipser. Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy. Mathematical Systems Theory, 17:13–27, 1984.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    G. Gottlob. NP trees and Carnap's modal logic. In Proceedings of the 34th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993. to appear.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    R. Ladner and N. Lynch. Relativization of questions about logspace computability. Mathematical Systems Theory, 10:19–32, 1976.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R. Ladner, N. Lynch, and A. Selman. A comparison of polynomial time reducibilities. Theoretical Computer Science, l(2):103–123, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Ogiwara. Generalized theorems on the relationships among reducibility notions to certain complexity classes. Mathematical Systems Theory. to appear.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    K. Wagner. The complexity of combinatorial problems with succinct input representation. Acta Informatica, 23:325–356, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    K. Wagner. Bounded query classes. SIAM Journal on Computing, 19(5):833–846, October 1990.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    C. Wilson. Relatizived circuit complexity. Journal of Computer and System Science, 31:169–181, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    C. Wilson. Relatizived NC. Mathematical Systems Theory, 20:13–29, 1987.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    C. Wilson. On the decomposability of NC and AC. SIAM Journal on Computing, 19(2):384–296, April 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mitsunori Ogiwara
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations