Does truth-table of linear norm reduce the one-query tautologies to a random oracle?

In our former works, for a given concept of reduction, we study the following hypothesis: “For a random oracle A , with probability one, the degree of the one-query tautologies with respect to A is strictly higher than the degree of A .” In our former works (Suzuki in Kobe J. Math. 15, 91–102, 1998;...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archive for mathematical logic 2008-07, Vol.47 (2), p.159-180
Hauptverfasser: Kumabe, Masahiro, Suzuki, Toshio, Yamazaki, Takeshi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In our former works, for a given concept of reduction, we study the following hypothesis: “For a random oracle A , with probability one, the degree of the one-query tautologies with respect to A is strictly higher than the degree of A .” In our former works (Suzuki in Kobe J. Math. 15, 91–102, 1998; in Inf. Comput. 176, 66–87, 2002; in Arch. Math. Logic 44, 751–762), the following three results are shown: The hypothesis for p-T (polynomial-time Turing) reduction is equivalent to the assertion that the probabilistic complexity class R is not equal to NP; The hypothesis for p-tt (polynomial-time truth-table) reduction implies that P is not NP; The hypothesis holds for each of the following: disjunctive reduction, conjunctive reduction, and p-btt (polynomial-time bounded-truth-table) reduction. In this paper, we show the following three results: (1) Let c be a positive real number. We consider a concept of truth-table reduction whose norm is at most c times size of input, where for a relativized propositional formula F , the size of F denotes the total number of occurrences of propositional variables, constants and propositional connectives. Then, our main result is that the hypothesis holds for such tt-reduction, provided that c is small enough. How small c can we take so that the above holds? It depends on our syntactic convention on one-query tautologies. In our setting, the statement holds for all c
ISSN:0933-5846
1432-0665
DOI:10.1007/s00153-008-0076-4