首页> 外文期刊>ACM transactions on computation theory >Polynomial-Time Random Oracles and Separating Complexity Classes
【24h】

Polynomial-Time Random Oracles and Separating Complexity Classes

机译:多项式时间随机畸形和分离复杂性等级

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Bennett and Gill [1981] showed that P~A ≠ NP~A ≠ coNP~A for a random oracle A, with probability 1. We investigate whether this result extends to individual polynomial-time random oracles. We consider two notions of random oracles: p-random oracles in the sense of martingales and resource-bounded measure [Lutz 1992; Ambos-Spies et al. 1997], and p-betting-game random oracles using the betting games generalization of resource-bounded measure [Buhrman et al. 2000]. Every p-betting-game random oracle is also p-random; whether the two notions are equivalent is an open problem. (1) We first show that P~A ≠ NP~A for every oracle A that is p-betting-game random. Ideally, we would extend (1) to p-random oracles. We show that answering this either way would imply an unrelativized complexity class separation: (2) If P~A≠ NP~A relative to every p-random oracle A, then BPP ≠ EXP. (3) If P~A=NP~A relative to some p-random oracle A, then P ≠ PSPACE. Rossman, Servedio, and Tan [2015] showed that the polynomial-time hierarchy is infinite relative to a random oracle, solving a longstanding open problem. We consider whether we can extend (1) to show that PH~A is infinite relative to oracles A that are p-betting-game random. Showing that PH~A separates at even its first level would also imply an unrelativized complexity class separation: (4) If NP~A ≠ coNP~A for a p-betting-game measure 1 class of oracles A, then NP ≠ EXP. (5) If PH~A is infinite relative to every p-random oracle A, then PH ≠ EXP. We also consider random oracles for time versus space, for example: (6) ~L~A ≠ P~A relative to every oracle A that is p-betting-game random.
机译:Bennett和Gill [1981]表明,对于随机的Oracle a,P_ a≠np〜a≠conp〜a,具有概率1.我们调查该结果是否延伸到单个多项式随机的oracels。我们考虑了两种随机的orcacles:Martingales感和资源有限措施中的P-ransory Oracles [Lutz 1992; Ambos-spies等。 1997年,使用博彩游戏的P-Betting-Game Orcount Oracles使用博彩游戏的资源有限度量[Buhrman等人。 2000]。每个P-Betting-Game随机Oracle也是对随机的;两种概念是否等同是一个公开问题。 (1)我们首先表明每个Oracle A为P-Betting-Game随机的P〜A≠np〜a。理想情况下,我们将扩展(1)延伸到对随机的oracles。我们表明,任何方式都会意味着一个不相似的复杂性类别分离:(2)如果p〜a≠np〜a相对于每个p-walant Oracle a,则bpp≠exp。 (3)如果p〜a = np〜a相对于一些p-walant oracle a,则p≠pspace。 Rossman,Servedio和Tan [2015]表明,多项式的等级是相对于随机甲骨文的无限,解决了一个长期的公开问题。我们考虑我们是否可以扩展(1)以显示pH〜a相对于oracles a的无限,这是一个p-betting-graph-grain-warent。表明PH〜A甚至在其第一级别分隔也意味着不相似的复杂性类别分离:(4)如果NP〜a≠孔〜a用于p-betting-grain-perse,则为1类oracles a,那么np≠exp。 (5)如果pH〜a相对于每个p-walant Oracle a,则是ph≠exp。我们还考虑随机oracels与空间相比,例如:(6)〜l〜a≠p〜a相对于每个Oracle a那样是p-betting-games。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号