Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Any problem complete for a class that properly extends P ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Problems complete for EXP or NEXP can be classified as infeasible regardless of how the P vs NP question is resolved.

    Any problem complete for a class that properly extends P cannot be in P.

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    EXP and NEXP both properly extend P.Infeasibility follows from being outside P (assuming the Cobham-Edmonds thesis).Problems complete for EXP or NEXP can be classified as infeasible regardless of ...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A problem complete for a class that properly contains P cannot be in P90%Problems complete for a class that properly contains P cannot be in P.86%The class F is extensionally equivalent to FP by Cobham's theorem77%A problem reducible from a complete problem for a class, and itself in...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    It is widely believed that like Open Question 1, Open Question 2 has an affirmative answer. [24] This in turn suggests that problems which are known to be in the class \(\textbf{NP} \cap \textbf{coNP}\) are unlikely to be \(\textbf{NP}\)-complete (and by symmetric considerations, also unlikely to be \(\textbf{coNP}\)-complete). This class consists of those problems \(X\) which possess polynomial sized certificates for demonstrating both membership and non-membership. It is easy to see that \(\

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective