Almost everywhere high nonuniform complexity
Journal of Computer and System Sciences
On 1-truth-table-hard languages
Theoretical Computer Science
Computability, enumerability, unsolvability
Cook versus Karp-Levin: separating completeness notions if NP is not small
Theoretical Computer Science
Genericity and measure for exponential time
MFCS '94 Selected papers from the 19th international symposium on Mathematical foundations of computer science
Resource bounded randomness and weakly complete problems
Theoretical Computer Science
The quantitative structure of exponential time
Complexity theory retrospective II
On the Structure of Polynomial Time Reducibility
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Diagonalizing over Deterministic Polynomial Time
CSL '87 Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Computer Science Logic
Some connections between nonuniform and uniform complexity classes
STOC '80 Proceedings of the twelfth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Resource-bounded Baire category: a stronger approach
SCT '95 Proceedings of the 10th Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference (SCT'95)
On the structure of complete sets: Almost everywhere complexity and infinitely often speedup
SFCS '76 Proceedings of the 17th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
J.H. Lutz (1993) proposed the study of the structure of the class NP=NTIME(poly) under the hypothesis that NP does not have p-measure 0 (with respect to Lutz's resource bounded measure. J.H. Lutz and E. Mayordomo (1996) showed that, under this hypothesis, NP-m-completeness and NP-T-completeness differ and they conjectured that further NP-completeness notions can be separated. Here we prove this conjecture for the bounded-query reducibilities. In fact we consider a new weaker hypothesis, namely the assumption that NP is not p-meager with respect to the resource bounded Baire category concept of Ambos-Spies et al.. We show that this category hypothesis is sufficient to get: (i) For every k/spl ges/2, NP-btt(k)-completeness is stronger than NP-btt(k+1)-completeness. (ii) For every k/spl ges/1, NP-bT(k)-completeness and NP-btt(k+1)-completeness are both stronger than NP-bT(k+1)-completeness. (iii) NP-btt-completeness is stronger than NP-tt-completeness.