Probabilistic algorithms Section 10.2 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Polynomial – Time Hierarchy
Advertisements

Isolation Technique April 16, 2001 Jason Ku Tao Li.
Based on Powerpoint slides by Giorgi Japaridze, Villanova University Space Complexity and Interactive Proof Systems Sections 8.0, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 10.4.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I
Variants of Turing machines
The class NP Section 7.3 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Theory of Computing Lecture 16 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck.
NL equals coNL Section 8.6 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Probabilistic Algorithms Michael Sipser Presented by: Brian Lawnichak.
Chernoff Bounds, and etc.
Computability and Complexity 22-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Complexity 18-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Probabilistic Algorithms.
Computability and Complexity 13-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov The Class NP.
P ROBABILISTIC T URING M ACHINES Stephany Coffman-Wolph Wednesday, March 28, 2007.
Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz 1 Turing Machines. Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz 2 Motivation Our main goal in this course is to analyze problems and categorize them.
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 7 April 20, 2004.
CS5371 Theory of Computation Lecture 11: Computability Theory II (TM Variants, Church-Turing Thesis)
Probabilistic Complexity. Probabilistic Algorithms Def: A probabilistic Turing Machine M is a type of non- deterministic TM, where each non-deterministic.
Submitted by : Estrella Eisenberg Yair Kaufman Ohad Lipsky Riva Gonen Shalom.
Randomized Computation
RELATIVIZATION CSE860 Vaishali Athale. Overview Introduction Idea behind “Relativization” Concept of “Oracle” Review of Diagonalization Proof Limits of.
Automata & Formal Languages, Feodor F. Dragan, Kent State University 1 CHAPTER 5 Reducibility Contents Undecidable Problems from Language Theory.
Complexity ©D. Moshkovitz 1 And Randomized Computations The Polynomial Hierarchy.
Computational Complexity Polynomial time O(n k ) input size n, k constant Tractable problems solvable in polynomial time(Opposite Intractable) Ex: sorting,
Approximation Algorithms Pages ADVANCED TOPICS IN COMPLEXITY THEORY.
1 2 Probabilistic Computations  Extend the notion of “efficient computation” beyond polynomial-time- Turing machines.  We will still consider only.
Computation Model and Complexity Class. 2 An algorithmic process that uses the result of a random draw to make an approximated decision has the ability.
. CLASSES RP AND ZPP By: SARIKA PAMMI. CONTENTS:  INTRODUCTION  RP  FACTS ABOUT RP  MONTE CARLO ALGORITHM  CO-RP  ZPP  FACTS ABOUT ZPP  RELATION.
Theory of Computing Lecture 21 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck.
Interactive proof systems Section 10.4 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Measuring complexity Section 7.1 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Manipulating the Quota in Weighted Voting Games (M. Zuckerman, P. Faliszewski, Y. Bachrach, and E. Elkind) ‏ Presented by: Sen Li Software Technologies.
Fall 2013 CMU CS Computational Complexity Lectures 8-9 Randomness, communication, complexity of unique solutions These slides are mostly a resequencing.
 2005 SDU Lecture13 Reducibility — A methodology for proving un- decidability.
1Computer Sciences Department. Book: INTRODUCTION TO THE THEORY OF COMPUTATION, SECOND EDITION, by: MICHAEL SIPSER Reference 3Computer Sciences Department.
Hierarchy theorems Section 9.1 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Donghyun (David) Kim Department of Mathematics and Computer Science North Carolina Central University 1 Chapter 7 Time Complexity Some slides are in courtesy.
Alternation Section 10.3 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
NP ⊆ PCP(n 3, 1) Theory of Computation. NP ⊆ PCP(n 3,1) What is that? NP ⊆ PCP(n 3,1) What is that?
The NP class. NP-completeness Lecture2. The NP-class The NP class is a class that contains all the problems that can be decided by a Non-Deterministic.
Theory of Computational Complexity TA : Junichi Teruyama Iwama lab. D3
 2005 SDU Lecture14 Mapping Reducibility, Complexity.
PROBABILITY AND COMPUTING RANDOMIZED ALGORITHMS AND PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS CHAPTER 1 IWAMA and ITO Lab. M1 Sakaidani Hikaru 1.
Umans Complexity Theory Lectures
Probabilistic Algorithms
Theory of Computability
Theory of Computability
Theory of Computability
Intractable Problems Time-Bounded Turing Machines Classes P and NP
Decidability of logical theories
Theory of Computability
Intro to Theory of Computation
Theory of Computability
CSC 4170 Theory of Computation Mapping Reducibility Section 5.3.
Theory of Computability
CSC 4170 Theory of Computation The class NP Section 7.3.
CS21 Decidability and Tractability
Decidability of logical theories
Theory of Computability
The Polynomial Hierarchy
Theory of Computability
CSC 4170 Theory of Computation Mapping Reducibility Section 5.3.
Theory of Computability
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 7 April 23, 2019.
Theory of Computability
Variants of Turing machines
Instructor: Aaron Roth
Theory of Computability
Intro to Theory of Computation
Probabilistic Complexity
Presentation transcript:

Probabilistic algorithms Section 10.2 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability

Definition of probabilistic Turing machines 10.2.a Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability Definition 10.3 A probabilistic Turing machine M is a type of nondeterministic TM in which each nondeterministic step is called a coin-flip step and has two legal next moves. We assign a probability to each branch b of M’s computation on input w as follows. Define the probability of b to be Pr[b] = 2 -k, where k is the number of coin-flip steps that occur on branch b. We define the probability that M accepts w to be Pr[M accepts w] =  Pr[b] b is an accepting branch In other words, the probability that M accepts w is the probability that we would reach an accepting configuration if we simulated M on w by flipping a coin to determine which move to follow at each coin-flip step. We let Pr[M rejects w] = 1 - Pr[M accepts w]

Example 10.2.b Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability start 0R0R -  R accept -  R reject 0  R -  R What is the probability that 0 is accepted? What is the probability that 00 is rejected? The language {0} is recognized with what error probability (see next slide)? Any other language is recognized with what error probability (see next slide)? 75% 100% 25% 100%

The class BPP 10.2.c Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability For 0 ≤  < ½, we say that M recognizes language A with error probability  if the probability that we would obtain the wrong answer by simulating M is at most . I.e.: 1. w  A implies Pr[M accepts w] ≥ 1- , and 2. w  A implies Pr[M rejects w] ≥ 1- . We also consider error probability bounds that depend on the input length n. For example, error probability  =2 -n indicates an exponentially small probability of error. Definition 10.4 BPP is the class of languages that are recognized by probabilistic polynomial time TMs with an error probability of 1/3. Instead of 1/3, any  strictly between 0 and ½ would yield an equivalent definition by virtue of the amplification lemma (on the next slide). It gives a simple way of making the error probability exponentially small. Note that a probabilistic algorithm with an error probability of is far more likely to give an erroneous result because the computer on which it runs has a hardware failure than because of an unlucky toss of its coins.

The amplification lemma 10.2.d Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability Lemma 10.5 Let  be a fixed constant strictly between 0 and ½, and p(n) any polynomial. Then any probabilistic polynomial time TM M 1 that operates with error probability  has an equivalent probabilistic polynomial time TM M 2 that operates with an error probability of 2 -p(n). Proof idea: M 2 simulates M 1 by running it a polynomial number of times and taking the majority vote of the outcomes. The probability of error decreases exponentially with the number of runs of M 1 made.

Open problems ssurrounding BPP 10.2.e Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability Besides the problems in P, which are obviously in BPP, many problems were known to be in BPP but not known to be in P. The number of such problems is decreasing, and it is conjectured that P = BPP. For a long time, one of the most famous problems that was known to be in BPP but not known to be in P was PRIMES. However, in 2002, Agrawal and his students showed that PRIMES  P. The relationship between BPP and NP is unknown: it is not known if BPP is a subset of NP, or if NP is a subset of BPP, or if they are incomparable. BPP is known to be a subset of PSPACE. It is however unknown whether vice versa also holds. It is also known that either P = BPP or P ≠ NP or both.