The exponential classes: complements and inclusions #
Everything in this file is inherited rather than proved. The two facts it rests on are polynomial-level and each cost a large development:
DescriptiveComplexity.piP_zero_eq– polynomial time is closed under complement, Grädel's capture theorem at level 0, through FO(LFP);DescriptiveComplexity.PSPACE_eq_coPSPACE– polynomial space is closed under complement, Savitch, through the deterministic QSAT walk.
DescriptiveComplexity.ComplexityClass.exp_compl carries both one exponential
up, and DescriptiveComplexity.ComplexityClass.exp_mono carries every
polynomial-level inclusion. Nothing of the two developments above is spent
twice; that is the first payoff of making exp an operator on an abstract
class.
Read on the definitions, the complement equalities say that SO(LFP) and SO(PFP) are closed under complement, which is the form a reader of the logic will look for; they are stated that way too.
The one construction with content is
DescriptiveComplexity.PSPACE_subset_PTIME_exp – an SO(TC) walk is REACH on
the expansion whose points are its states – which lives in
DescriptiveComplexity.Exponential.Reach and starts the whole tower.
No claim is made for NEXPTIME, which is not expected to be closed under complement.
The two polynomial-level complement facts, in the form used here #
Polynomial time is closed under complement
(DescriptiveComplexity.piP_zero_eq, restated as an equality of classes).
Dependency graph
Polynomial space is closed under complement
(DescriptiveComplexity.PSPACE_eq_coPSPACE, restated the same way).
Dependency graph
The complement equalities #
EXPTIME = coEXPTIME: inherited from PTIME.compl = PTIME through
DescriptiveComplexity.ComplexityClass.exp_compl.
Dependency graph
EXPSPACE = coEXPSPACE: inherited from Savitch through the same
operator.
Dependency graph
A problem is in EXPTIME exactly when its complement is.
Dependency graph
A problem is in EXPSPACE exactly when its complement is.
Dependency graph
SO(≤, LFP) is closed under complement – the second-order shadow of
DescriptiveComplexity.piP_zero_eq, and the reading of
DescriptiveComplexity.EXPTIME_eq_coEXPTIME on the definition.
Dependency graph
SO(≤, PFP) is closed under complement – the second-order shadow of Savitch.
Dependency graph
The inclusions #
Every line but the first is DescriptiveComplexity.ComplexityClass.exp_mono on
a polynomial-level inclusion, read through the bridge theorems of
DescriptiveComplexity.Exponential.Classes.
PSPACE ⊆ EXPTIME: an SO(TC) walk is a reachability question on the
expansion whose points are its states, and reachability is in polynomial time.
On the definitions this is SO(TC) ⊆ SO(LFP).
Dependency graph
PSPACE ⊆ coEXPTIME, by the complement equality.
Dependency graph
PTIME ⊆ PSPACE, routed through NP – the polynomial-level inclusion the
exponential ones are lifted from.
Dependency graph
EXPTIME ⊆ EXPSPACE, i.e., SO(LFP) ⊆ SO(PFP) – the second-order
shadow of PTIME ⊆ PSPACE.
Dependency graph
coEXPTIME ⊆ EXPSPACE, by the complement equality.
Dependency graph
EXPTIME ⊆ NEXPTIME, the second-order shadow of PTIME ⊆ NP.
Dependency graph
NEXPTIME ⊆ EXPSPACE, the second-order shadow of NP ⊆ PSPACE.
Dependency graph
NL.exp ⊆ EXPTIME, the second-order shadow of NL ⊆ PTIME. Together with
DescriptiveComplexity.PSPACE_subset_NL_exp it sandwiches NL.exp between
PSPACE and EXPTIME.
Dependency graph
The polynomial classes inside the exponential ones #
All of these route through PSPACE ⊆ EXPTIME, which is the only inclusion of
this development with content.
Dependency graph
Dependency graph
Dependency graph
The whole polynomial hierarchy sits inside EXPTIME, through
DescriptiveComplexity.PH_subset_PSPACE.