Lecture 28

Theory of Computation
Lecture 28
Sarmad Abbasi
Virtual University
December 7, 2007
Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)
December 7, 2007
1 / 30
The Cook-Levin Theorem
Last time we were discussing the proof of the Cook-Levin Theorem.

Here is the basic outline of the proof.
December 7, 2007
2 / 30
We want to show that if L NP then

L p SAT .
The idea is that if L is in NP then
L is accepted by an NTM M in polynomial time.
December 7, 2007
3 / 30
What do we want:
We want a to show that there is a function f that we can compute in
polynomial time such that
1
x L then f (x) SAT .
We do this by creating a formula x such that:

1
x is satisfiable if and only if M accepts x.
December 7, 2007
4 / 30

What do we want:
We want a to show that there is a function f that we can compute in
polynomial time such that
1
x L then f (x) SAT .
We do this by creating a formula x such that:

1
x is satisfiable if and only if M accepts x.
if M accepts x then we can make a tableau that shows an

accepting computation of M on x.
This tableau will be an nk nk tableau since M runs in polynomial

time.
The formula x is going to be satisfiable if and only if such a
tableau exists.
December 7, 2007
5 / 30
The main idea is to make several variables:

xi,j,s
if the tableau contains a symbol s in the (i, j) place then we will set the
variable xi,j,s = ture.
December 7, 2007
6 / 30
The tableau has several properties:

1
Each entry of the tableau has exactly one entry.
The first computation is the initial computation of M on x.
The tablature corresponds to an accepting computation.
Each configuration row is obtained from the previous row through

the yields relation.
December 7, 2007
7 / 30
We try to express these properties in propositional logic.
December 7, 2007
8 / 30

1
Each entry of the tableau has exactly one entry. we used the
formula cell to express this.
The first computation is the initial computation of M on x. We

used the formula start to express this.
The tableau corresponds to an accepting computation. We used

the formula accept to express this.
Each configuration row is obtained from the previous row through

the yields relation. We will use the formula
move
to express this.
December 7, 2007
9 / 30
In the last lecture we looked closely at

cell
start
and
accept
In this lecture we want to concentrate on
move .
December 7, 2007
10 / 30
Next was the concept of legal windows. We said a 2 3 window is

legal if it can appear in a possible computation of the machine M.
As an example, let us take a machine with
(q0 , a) = {(q2 , b, R)}
and
(q0 , b) = {(q1 , a, R), (q2 , c, L)}.
Let us look at some legal windows now:
December 7, 2007
11 / 30
# a b
# a b
b a b
b a b
q0 a b
b q2 b
q0 b b
b c b
These are legal windows.
December 7, 2007
12 / 30

Let us look at some illegal windows.
# a b
# a #
b a b
b c b
q0 a b
b q1 b
q0 b b
c q2 b
These are illegal windows.
December 7, 2007
13 / 30
A very critical observations are the following:

1
By observing the transition function of M we can compute the set

of all legal windows.
Note that this has to be done once in for all. It need not be
recomputed for each x. (Although it is not hard to compute also
but we do not need to do that!)
If we have a tableau that has the first configuration which is the

initial configuration and each window is legal then tableau
corresponds to a computation of M on x
Let us discuss these points one by one.
December 7, 2007
14 / 30

By observing the transition function of M we can compute the set of all
legal windows.
This is not very hard to see. In your homework, I have given you a
NTM and asked you to compute all the possible legal windows. Let us
nevertheless outline a simple (but time consuming method).
1
Note that these are windows of size 2 3. Thus they have 6

entries. The table can let us say have r possible entries. Thus the
total number of possible windows is r 6 . Hence there are only a
finite number of them.
Thus we can go through every possible window and figure out if it

is legal or not.
December 7, 2007
15 / 30
For each possible window W
If W is legal output W .
The above algorithm will compute all legal windows. Provided we can
test if a window is legal. That is not difficult to do!
December 7, 2007
16 / 30
For each possible window W
If W is legal output W .
The above algorithm will compute all legal windows. Provided we can
test if a window is legal. That is not difficult to do!
Let the output of this algorithm be L the set of all legal windows.
December 7, 2007
17 / 30
Note that this has to be done once in for all. It need not be recomputed
for each x. (Although it is not hard to compute also but we do not need
to do that!).
Note that the legality of the window does not depend on the input to
the machine M. It only depends on the transition table of M. Thus the
set of all legal windows can be computed once in for all.
December 7, 2007
18 / 30

Lastly, note that if all windows in a tableau are legal then it
corresponds to a computation of M. In fact, the definition of a legal
window is designed to enforce this. This is because a 2 3 legal
window ensure that the middle element in the next configuration
comes from a legal move of the NTM M.
Let us look at the following figure:
December 7, 2007
19 / 30
For this we need to do two exercises.

Let C and D be two configurations such that
C `M D
Write C and D as two rows in the tableau and prove that all the 2 3
windows are legal in that part of the tableau.
December 7, 2007
20 / 30
December 7, 2007
21 / 30
Let C and D be two configurations such that

C
does not yield
D
Write C and D as two rows in the tableau and prove that at least one of
the 2 3 windows are is illegal in that part of the tableau. This is
because you will have to cheat somewhere. And at that point you will
have to create an illegal window.
December 7, 2007
22 / 30
December 7, 2007
23 / 30
Now we are in a position to start constructing cell . Let us go one step

at a time. Let us take all the legal windows.
L = {W1 , W2 , . . . , Wt }. What we want to say is that the first window is
legal. We can say that by saying....
1
The first window is W1 or
and so on....
December 7, 2007
24 / 30

Let us do this by an example. Let us say that W1 is
# q0 a
# b q2
Then we can simply write
x1,1,# x1,2,q0 x1,3,a x2,1,# x2,2,b x2,3,q2
Similarly if I want to say that the (i, j)-th window is equal to W1 I can
write
xi,j,# xi,j+1,q0 xi,j+2,a xi+1,j,# xi+1,j+1,b xi+1,j+2,q2
December 7, 2007
25 / 30
Let us denote i,j,l to be the formula that says that the (i, j)-th window
is equal to Wl . Then to say that the (i, j)-th window is legal all I have to
do is to say
t
_
(i, j, l)
l=1
This says that the (i, j)-th window is either W1 or W2 or and so on.
Which is equivalent to saying that the (i, j) window is legal.
December 7, 2007
26 / 30
So what would the following formula express:

t
^_
(i, j, l)
i,j l=1
This says that all windows are legal.

This is our move .
December 7, 2007
27 / 30
Now, let us look at our grand boolean formula that we have created.
x = cell start accept move
December 7, 2007
28 / 30

This formula is satisfiable if and only if all four components are
satisfiable. Let us look at them one by one:
1
cell is satisfiable if and only if we have an assignment of the
variables that corresponds to putting one symbol in each entry of
the tableau. Thus the tableau is properly filled.
2
cell is satisfied if and only if the variable assignment corresponds
to filing the first row with the initial configuration of M on x.
3
accept is satisfied if the variable assignment corresponds to
having the accept sate somewhere in the tableau. That means the
tableau encodes an accepting computation.
4
Lastly, and most importantly move is satisfied if the assignment
corresponds to filling rows in such a way that they follow from legal
moves of the machine.
In summary
x
is satisfiable if and only if there exists a tableau with these properties.
December 7, 2007
29 / 30
To finish the proof of Cook-Levin Theorem let us consider the following

algorithm:
1
On input x
Compute x and output it.
This algorithm computes a function in polynomial time. Our discussion

shows that this is a polynomial time reducibility from L to SAT . This
shows that
L p SAT .
The proof of Cook-Levin Theorem is therefore complete.
December 7, 2007
30 / 30

Lecture 28

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture 28

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory of Computation

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Last time we were discussing the proof of the Cook-Levin Theorem.

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

We want to show that if L NP then

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

x L then f (x) SAT .

We do this by creating a formula x such that:

x is satisfiable if and only if M accepts x.

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

x L then f (x) SAT .

We do this by creating a formula x such that:

x is satisfiable if and only if M accepts x.

if M accepts x then we can make a tableau that shows an

This tableau will be an nk nk tableau since M runs in polynomial

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

The main idea is to make several variables:

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

The tableau has several properties:

Each entry of the tableau has exactly one entry.

The first computation is the initial computation of M on x.

The tablature corresponds to an accepting computation.

Each configuration row is obtained from the previous row through

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

We try to express these properties in propositional logic.

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

The first computation is the initial computation of M on x. We

The tableau corresponds to an accepting computation. We used

Each configuration row is obtained from the previous row through

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

In the last lecture we looked closely at

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Next was the concept of legal windows. We said a 2 3 window is

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

A very critical observations are the following:

By observing the transition function of M we can compute the set

If we have a tableau that has the first configuration which is the

Let us discuss these points one by one.

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Note that these are windows of size 2 3. Thus they have 6

Thus we can go through every possible window and figure out if it

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

For each possible window W

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)

The Cook-Levin Theorem

For each possible window W

Sarmad Abbasi (Virtual University)