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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    NP is defined via non-deterministic Turing machines whose... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→NP is not known to be closed under complementation

    NP is defined via non-deterministic Turing machines whose acceptance and rejection conventions are asymmetric

    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

    Skepticism1 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.
    NP is not known to be closed under complementationShowing a formula is in VALID requires checking all 2^n valuations, which is not...

    Similar

    NP is defined in terms of non-deterministic Turing machines whose acce...99%NP is defined in terms of non-deterministic Turing machines whose acce...99%For a deterministic machine, acceptance and rejection conventions are ...87%For deterministic machines, acceptance and rejection conventions are s...86%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    The graph \(G_{\phi}\) for the formula \((p_1 \vee p_2 \vee p_3) \wedge (\neg p_1 \vee p_2 \vee \neg p_3) \wedge (p_1 \vee \neg p_2 \vee \neg p_3)\). A reduction of \(3\text{-}\sc{SAT}\) to \(\sc{INDEPENDENT}\ \sc{SET}\) can now be described as follows: Let \(\phi\) be a \(3\text{-}\sc{CNF}\) formula consisting of \(n\) clauses as depicted above. We construct a graph \(G_{\phi} = \langle V,E \rangle\) consisting of \(n\)-triangles \(T_1,\ldots,T_n\) such that the nodes of \(T_i\) are respect

    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