Skip to main content

On optimal polynomial time approximations: P-levelability vs. δ-levelability

Extended abstract

  • Computational Complexity II
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 944))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Safe and unsafe polynomial time approximations were introduced by Meyer and Paterson [4] and Yesha [8], respectively. The question of which sets have optimal safe approximations was investigated by several authors (see e.g. [3,6,7]). Orponen et al. [5] showed that a problem has an optimal polynomial time approximation if and only if neither it nor its complement is p-levelable. Recently Duris and Rolim [2] considered the unsafe case and compared the existence of optimal polynomial time approximations for both cases. They left open the question, however, whether there are intractable sets with optimal unsafe approximations and whether there are sets with optimal unsafe approximations but without optimal safe approximations. Here we answer these questions affirmatively. Moreover, we consider a variant of Duris and Rolim's δ-levelability concept related to the nonexistence of optimal unsafe approximations.

This work was supported in part by the HCM program of the European Community under grant CHRX-CT93-0415 (COLORET Network).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J.L. Balcázar and U. Schöning: Bi-immune sets for complexity classes. Math. Systems Theory, 18 (1985) 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  2. P. Duris and J.D.P. Rolim E-complete sets do not have optimal polynomial time approximations. In: Proc. MFCS '94, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 841 (1994) 38–51, Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  3. K. Ko and D. Moore: Completeness, approximation and density. SIAM J. Comput. 10 (1981) 787–796.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A.R. Meyer and M.S. Paterson: With what frequency are apparently intractable problems difficult? In: Tech. Rep. TM-126, Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Orponen, A. Russo and U. Schöning: Optimal approximations and polynomially levelable sets. SIAM J. Comput. 15 (1986) 399–408.

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Orponen and U. Schöning: The structure of polynomial complexity cores. In: Proc. MFCS '84, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 176 (1984) 452–458, Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D.A. Russo: Optimal approximations of complete sets. In: Proc. 1st Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 38 (1986) 311–324, Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Y. Yesha: On certain polynomial-time truth-table reducibilities of complete sets to sparse sets. SIAM J. Comput. 12 (1983) 411–425.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Zoltán Fülöp Ferenc Gécseg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ambos-Spies, K. (1995). On optimal polynomial time approximations: P-levelability vs. δ-levelability. In: Fülöp, Z., Gécseg, F. (eds) Automata, Languages and Programming. ICALP 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 944. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60084-1_90

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60084-1_90

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60084-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49425-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics