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
    If none of the intermediate inclusions were proper, L wou... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→At least one of the inclusions L ⊆ NL, NL ⊆ P, P ⊆ NP, or NP ⊆ PSPACE must be proper

    If none of the intermediate inclusions were proper, L would equal PSPACE, contradicting the Space Hierarchy Theorem

    Modality & Possibility
    ?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 & Possibility

    Related

    At least one of the inclusions L ⊆ NL, NL ⊆ P, P ⊆ NP, or NP ⊆ PSPACE must be pr...L is a proper subset of PSPACE

    Similar

    At least one of the inclusions among L, P, NP, PSPACE, and EXP must be...78%

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    If all four inclusions were equalities, L would equal PSPACE, contradi...77%
    F ⊢ Prf_F(n̲, ⌈G_F⌉) would contradict Gödel's incompleteness theorem75%
    At least one of the inclusions L ⊆ NL, NL ⊆ P, P ⊆ NP, NP ⊆ PSPACE mus...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    2 Complexity classes and the hierarchy theorems Recall that a complexity class is a set of languages all of which can be decided within a given time or space complexity bound \(t(n)\) or \(s(n)\) with respect to a fixed model of computation. g. non-recursive ones) it is standard to restrict attention to complexity classes defined when \(t(n)\) and \(s(n)\) are time or space constructible. e. a string of \(n\) 1s) halts after exactly \(t(n)\) steps. Similarly, \(s(n)\) is said to be space constru

    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