Theory of recursive functions and effective computability
Theory of recursive functions and effective computability
Structural complexity 1
Software complexity: measures and methods
Software complexity: measures and methods
An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications (2nd ed.)
An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications (2nd ed.)
Communication complexity and parallel computing
Communication complexity and parallel computing
Communication complexity
On the Length of Programs for Computing Finite Binary Sequences
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
An Overview of the Theory of Computational Complexity
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
A Theory of Program Size Formally Identical to Information Theory
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes
Rebirth of the computer industry
Communications of the ACM - Adaptive middleware
Elements of Software Science (Operating and programming systems series)
Elements of Software Science (Operating and programming systems series)
Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computability
Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computability
Communication complexity for file synchronization is undecidable
ACM SIGACT News
The process complexity and effective random tests.
STOC '72 Proceedings of the fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Revising Type-2 Computation and Degrees of Discontinuity
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
Algorithmic complexity as a criterion of unsolvability
Theoretical Computer Science
A note on blum static complexity measures
WTCS'12 Proceedings of the 2012 international conference on Theoretical Computer Science: computation, physics and beyond
Randomness behaviour in blum universal static complexity spaces
DCFS'12 Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Descriptional Complexity of Formal Systems
Hi-index | 0.00 |
The main goal of this paper is to compare recursive algorithms such as Turing machines with such super-recursive algorithms as inductive Turing machines. This comparison is made in a general setting of dual complexity measures such as Kolmogorov or algorithmic complexity. To make adequate comparison, we reconsider the standard axiomatic approach to complexity of algorithms. The new approach allows us to achieve a more adequate representation of static system complexity in the axiomatic context. It is demonstrated that for solving many problems inductive Turing machines have much lower complexity than Turing machines and other recursive algorithms. Thus, inductive Turing machines are not only more powerful, but also more efficient than Turing machines.