PSPACE

Last updated
Inclusions of complexity classes including P, NP, co-NP, BPP, P/poly, PH, and PSPACE Complexity-classes-polynomial.svg
Inclusions of complexity classes including P, NP, co-NP, BPP, P/poly, PH, and PSPACE
Unsolved problem in computer science:

In computational complexity theory, PSPACE is the set of all decision problems that can be solved by a Turing machine using a polynomial amount of space.

Contents

Formal definition

If we denote by SPACE(f(n)), the set of all problems that can be solved by Turing machines using O(f(n)) space for some function f of the input size n, then we can define PSPACE formally as [1]

It turns out that allowing the Turing machine to be nondeterministic does not add any extra power. Because of Savitch's theorem, [2] NPSPACE is equivalent to PSPACE, essentially because a deterministic Turing machine can simulate a nondeterministic Turing machine without needing much more space (even though it may use much more time). [3] Also, the complements of all problems in PSPACE are also in PSPACE, meaning that co-PSPACE = PSPACE.[ citation needed ]

Relation among other classes

A representation of the relation among complexity classes Complexity subsets pspace.svg
A representation of the relation among complexity classes

The following relations are known between PSPACE and the complexity classes NL, P, NP, PH, EXPTIME and EXPSPACE (note that ⊊ denotes strict containment, not to be confused with ⊈):

From the third line, it follows that both in the first and in the second line, at least one of the set containments must be strict, but it is not known which. It is widely suspected that all are strict.

The containments in the third line are both known to be strict. The first follows from direct diagonalization (the space hierarchy theorem, NL ⊊ NPSPACE) and the fact that PSPACE = NPSPACE via Savitch's theorem. The second follows simply from the space hierarchy theorem.

The hardest problems in PSPACE are the PSPACE-complete problems. See PSPACE-complete for examples of problems that are suspected to be in PSPACE but not in NP.

Closure properties

The class PSPACE is closed under operations union, complementation, and Kleene star.

Other characterizations

An alternative characterization of PSPACE is the set of problems decidable by an alternating Turing machine in polynomial time, sometimes called APTIME or just AP. [4]

A logical characterization of PSPACE from descriptive complexity theory is that it is the set of problems expressible in second-order logic with the addition of a transitive closure operator. A full transitive closure is not needed; a commutative transitive closure and even weaker forms suffice. It is the addition of this operator that (possibly) distinguishes PSPACE from PH.

A major result of complexity theory is that PSPACE can be characterized as all the languages recognizable by a particular interactive proof system, the one defining the class IP. In this system, there is an all-powerful prover trying to convince a randomized polynomial-time verifier that a string is in the language. It should be able to convince the verifier with high probability if the string is in the language, but should not be able to convince it except with low probability if the string is not in the language.

PSPACE can be characterized as the quantum complexity class QIP. [5]

PSPACE is also equal to PCTC, problems solvable by classical computers using closed timelike curves, [6] as well as to BQPCTC, problems solvable by quantum computers using closed timelike curves. [7]

PSPACE-completeness

A language B is PSPACE-complete if it is in PSPACE and it is PSPACE-hard, which means for all A ∈ PSPACE, , where means that there is a polynomial-time many-one reduction from A to B. PSPACE-complete problems are of great importance to studying PSPACE problems because they represent the most difficult problems in PSPACE. Finding a simple solution to a PSPACE-complete problem would mean we have a simple solution to all other problems in PSPACE because all PSPACE problems could be reduced to a PSPACE-complete problem. [8]

An example of a PSPACE-complete problem is the quantified Boolean formula problem (usually abbreviated to QBF or TQBF; the T stands for "true"). [8]

Notes

  1. Arora & Barak (2009) p.81
  2. Arora & Barak (2009) p.85
  3. Arora & Barak (2009) p.86
  4. Arora & Barak (2009) p.100
  5. Rahul Jain; Zhengfeng Ji; Sarvagya Upadhyay; John Watrous (July 2009). "QIP = PSPACE". arXiv: 0907.4737 [quant-ph].
  6. S. Aaronson (March 2005). "NP-complete problems and physical reality". SIGACT News. arXiv: quant-ph/0502072 . Bibcode:2005quant.ph..2072A. doi:10.1145/1052796.1052804. S2CID   18759797..
  7. Watrous, John; Aaronson, Scott (2009). "Closed timelike curves make quantum and classical computing equivalent". Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 465 (2102): 631. arXiv: 0808.2669 . Bibcode:2009RSPSA.465..631A. doi:10.1098/rspa.2008.0350. S2CID   745646.
  8. 1 2 Arora & Barak (2009) p.83

Related Research Articles

In theoretical computer science and mathematics, computational complexity theory focuses on classifying computational problems according to their resource usage, and explores the relationships between these classifications. A computational problem is a task solved by a computer. A computation problem is solvable by mechanical application of mathematical steps, such as an algorithm.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NP (complexity)</span> Complexity class used to classify decision problems

In computational complexity theory, NP is a complexity class used to classify decision problems. NP is the set of decision problems for which the problem instances, where the answer is "yes", have proofs verifiable in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine, or alternatively the set of problems that can be solved in polynomial time by a nondeterministic Turing machine.

In computational complexity theory, a decision problem is PSPACE-complete if it can be solved using an amount of memory that is polynomial in the input length and if every other problem that can be solved in polynomial space can be transformed to it in polynomial time. The problems that are PSPACE-complete can be thought of as the hardest problems in PSPACE, the class of decision problems solvable in polynomial space, because a solution to any one such problem could easily be used to solve any other problem in PSPACE.

In computational complexity theory, the complexity class EXPTIME (sometimes called EXP or DEXPTIME) is the set of all decision problems that are solvable by a deterministic Turing machine in exponential time, i.e., in O(2p(n)) time, where p(n) is a polynomial function of n.

In computational complexity theory, EXPSPACE is the set of all decision problems solvable by a deterministic Turing machine in exponential space, i.e., in space, where is a polynomial function of . Some authors restrict to be a linear function, but most authors instead call the resulting class ESPACE. If we use a nondeterministic machine instead, we get the class NEXPSPACE, which is equal to EXPSPACE by Savitch's theorem.

In computational complexity theory, the time hierarchy theorems are important statements about time-bounded computation on Turing machines. Informally, these theorems say that given more time, a Turing machine can solve more problems. For example, there are problems that can be solved with n2 time but not n time, where n is the input length.

The space complexity of an algorithm or a data structure is the amount of memory space required to solve an instance of the computational problem as a function of characteristics of the input. It is the memory required by an algorithm until it executes completely. This includes the memory space used by its inputs, called input space, and any other (auxiliary) memory it uses during execution, which is called auxiliary space.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Complexity class</span> Set of problems in computational complexity theory

In computational complexity theory, a complexity class is a set of computational problems "of related resource-based complexity". The two most commonly analyzed resources are time and memory.

In computational complexity theory, Savitch's theorem, proved by Walter Savitch in 1970, gives a relationship between deterministic and non-deterministic space complexity. It states that for any function ,

In computational complexity theory, non-deterministic space or NSPACE is the computational resource describing the memory space for a non-deterministic Turing machine. It is the non-deterministic counterpart of DSPACE.

In computational complexity theory, DSPACE or SPACE is the computational resource describing the resource of memory space for a deterministic Turing machine. It represents the total amount of memory space that a "normal" physical computer would need to solve a given computational problem with a given algorithm.

In computational complexity theory, P, also known as PTIME or DTIME(nO(1)), is a fundamental complexity class. It contains all decision problems that can be solved by a deterministic Turing machine using a polynomial amount of computation time, or polynomial time.

In computational complexity theory, the polynomial hierarchy is a hierarchy of complexity classes that generalize the classes NP and co-NP. Each class in the hierarchy is contained within PSPACE. The hierarchy can be defined using oracle machines or alternating Turing machines. It is a resource-bounded counterpart to the arithmetical hierarchy and analytical hierarchy from mathematical logic. The union of the classes in the hierarchy is denoted PH.

In computational complexity theory, the space hierarchy theorems are separation results that show that both deterministic and nondeterministic machines can solve more problems in (asymptotically) more space, subject to certain conditions. For example, a deterministic Turing machine can solve more decision problems in space n log n than in space n. The somewhat weaker analogous theorems for time are the time hierarchy theorems.

In computational complexity theory, the complexity class NEXPTIME is the set of decision problems that can be solved by a non-deterministic Turing machine using time .

In computational complexity theory, an alternating Turing machine (ATM) is a non-deterministic Turing machine (NTM) with a rule for accepting computations that generalizes the rules used in the definition of the complexity classes NP and co-NP. The concept of an ATM was set forth by Chandra and Stockmeyer and independently by Kozen in 1976, with a joint journal publication in 1981.

In computational complexity theory, NL is the complexity class containing decision problems that can be solved by a nondeterministic Turing machine using a logarithmic amount of memory space.

In computational complexity theory, P/poly is a complexity class representing problems that can be solved by small circuits. More precisely, it is the set of formal languages that have polynomial-size circuit families. It can also be defined equivalently in terms of Turing machines with advice, extra information supplied to the Turing machine along with its input, that may depend on the input length but not on the input itself. In this formulation, P/poly is the class of decision problems that can be solved by a polynomial-time Turing machine with advice strings of length polynomial in the input size. These two different definitions make P/poly central to circuit complexity and non-uniform complexity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Structural complexity theory</span>

In computational complexity theory of computer science, the structural complexity theory or simply structural complexity is the study of complexity classes, rather than computational complexity of individual problems and algorithms. It involves the research of both internal structures of various complexity classes and the relations between different complexity classes.

In computational complexity theory, QMA, which stands for Quantum Merlin Arthur, is the set of languages for which, when a string is in the language, there is a polynomial-size quantum proof that convinces a polynomial time quantum verifier of this fact with high probability. Moreover, when the string is not in the language, every polynomial-size quantum state is rejected by the verifier with high probability.

References