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
    Complexity classes such as NL and P strictly contain AC⁰. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→First-order logic (FO) alone is insufficient to characterize complexity classes above AC⁰, and must be extended with fixed-point or transitive closure operators to capture stronger classes.

    Complexity classes such as NL and P strictly contain AC⁰.

    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

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Adding least fixed-point operators to FO yields FO(LFP), which captures P; addin...First-order logic (FO) alone is insufficient to characterize complexity classes ...First-order logic captures only AC⁰, the class of languages decidable by polynom...

    Similar

    It is widely believed that NP and coNP are distinct classes.86%BQP contains both P and BPP83%Problems complete for a class that properly contains P cannot be in P.81%Therefore R cannot be an element of A (for any class A).80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    In other words, the descriptive complexity of \(X\) is measured according to the sort of formulas which is needed to define its instances relative to an appropriate background class of finitary structures. g. ), it is possible to describe their instances as finite structures in the conventional sense of first-order model theory. [45] Given such a signature \(\tau\), we define \(\text{Mod}(\tau)\) to be the class of all \(\tau\)-structures with finite domain. In the context of descriptive complex

    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