{"title":"NP证人的汉明近似","authors":"Daniel Sheldon Neal","doi":"10.4086/TOC.2013.V009A022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given a satisfiable 3-SAT formula, how hard is it to find an assignment to the variables that has Hamming distance at most n=2 to a satisfying assignment? More generally, consider any polynomial-time verifier for any NP-complete language. A d(n)-Hamming- approximation algorithm for the verifier is one that, given any member x of the language, outputs in polynomial time a string a with Hamming distance at most d(n) to some witness w, where (x; w) is accepted by the verifier. Previous results have shown that, if P6NP, every NP-complete language has a verifier for which there is no (n=2 n 2=3+d )-Hamming- approximation algorithm, for various constants d 0. Our main result is that, if P6NP, then every paddable NP-complete language has a verifier that admits no (n=2+ O( p n log n))-Hamming-approximation algorithm. That is, one can't get even half the bits right. We also consider natural verifiers for various well-known NP-complete problems. They do have n=2-Hamming-approximation algorithms, but, if P6NP, have no (n=2 n e )-Hamming-approximation algorithms for any constant e > 0. We show similar results for randomized algorithms.","PeriodicalId":113162,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Computational Complexity","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hamming Approximation of NP Witnesses\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Sheldon Neal\",\"doi\":\"10.4086/TOC.2013.V009A022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given a satisfiable 3-SAT formula, how hard is it to find an assignment to the variables that has Hamming distance at most n=2 to a satisfying assignment? More generally, consider any polynomial-time verifier for any NP-complete language. A d(n)-Hamming- approximation algorithm for the verifier is one that, given any member x of the language, outputs in polynomial time a string a with Hamming distance at most d(n) to some witness w, where (x; w) is accepted by the verifier. Previous results have shown that, if P6NP, every NP-complete language has a verifier for which there is no (n=2 n 2=3+d )-Hamming- approximation algorithm, for various constants d 0. Our main result is that, if P6NP, then every paddable NP-complete language has a verifier that admits no (n=2+ O( p n log n))-Hamming-approximation algorithm. That is, one can't get even half the bits right. We also consider natural verifiers for various well-known NP-complete problems. They do have n=2-Hamming-approximation algorithms, but, if P6NP, have no (n=2 n e )-Hamming-approximation algorithms for any constant e > 0. We show similar results for randomized algorithms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":113162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv: Computational Complexity\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv: Computational Complexity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4086/TOC.2013.V009A022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Computational Complexity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4086/TOC.2013.V009A022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
给定一个可满足的3-SAT公式,找到汉明距离最多为n=2的变量的赋值有多难?更一般地说,考虑任何np完全语言的多项式时间验证器。验证者的d(n)-Hamming-近似算法是,给定语言的任何成员x,在多项式时间内输出一个字符串A,其Hamming距离不超过d(n)到某个见证w,其中(x;W)被验证者接受。先前的结果表明,如果P6NP,对于各种常数d 0,每个np完备语言都有一个不存在(n=2 n 2=3+d)- hamming -近似算法的验证者。我们的主要结果是,如果是P6NP,那么每一个可填充的np完全语言都有一个不允许(n=2+ O(pn log n))- hamming逼近算法的验证器。也就是说,一个人连一半都做不对。我们还考虑了各种众所周知的np完全问题的自然验证器。它们确实有n=2- haming -近似算法,但是,如果P6NP,对于任何常数e > 0,都没有(n=2 n e)- haming -近似算法。我们展示了随机算法的类似结果。
Given a satisfiable 3-SAT formula, how hard is it to find an assignment to the variables that has Hamming distance at most n=2 to a satisfying assignment? More generally, consider any polynomial-time verifier for any NP-complete language. A d(n)-Hamming- approximation algorithm for the verifier is one that, given any member x of the language, outputs in polynomial time a string a with Hamming distance at most d(n) to some witness w, where (x; w) is accepted by the verifier. Previous results have shown that, if P6NP, every NP-complete language has a verifier for which there is no (n=2 n 2=3+d )-Hamming- approximation algorithm, for various constants d 0. Our main result is that, if P6NP, then every paddable NP-complete language has a verifier that admits no (n=2+ O( p n log n))-Hamming-approximation algorithm. That is, one can't get even half the bits right. We also consider natural verifiers for various well-known NP-complete problems. They do have n=2-Hamming-approximation algorithms, but, if P6NP, have no (n=2 n e )-Hamming-approximation algorithms for any constant e > 0. We show similar results for randomized algorithms.