Space Efficiency of Propositional Knowledge Representation Formalisms

We investigate the space efficiency of a Propositional Knowledge Representation (PKR) formalism. Intuitively, the space efficiency of a formalism F in representing a certain piece of knowledge A, is the size of the shortest formula of F that represents A. In this paper we assume that knowledge is either a set of propositional interpretations (models) or a set of propositional formulae (theorems). We provide a formal way of talking about the relative ability of PKR formalisms to compactly represent a set of models or a set of theorems. We introduce two new compactness measures, the corresponding classes, and show that the relative space efficiency of a PKR formalism in representing models/theorems is directly related to such classes. In particular, we consider formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning, such as circumscription and default logic, as well as belief revision operators and the stable model semantics for logic programs with negation. One interesting result is that formalisms with the same time complexity do not necessarily belong to the same space efficiency class

Immunity and Simplicity for Exact Counting and Other Counting Classes

Ko [RAIRO 24, 1990] and Bruschi [TCS 102, 1992] showed that in some relativized world, PSPACE (in fact, ParityP) contains a set that is immune to the polynomial hierarchy (PH). In this paper, we study and settle the question of (relativized) separations with immunity for PH and the counting classes PP, C_{=}P, and ParityP in all possible pairwise combinations. Our main result is that there is an oracle A relative to which C_{=}P contains a set that is immune to BPP^{ParityP}. In particular, this C_{=}P^A set is immune to PH^{A} and ParityP^{A}. Strengthening results of Tor\'{a}n [J.ACM 38, 1991] and Green [IPL 37, 1991], we also show that, in suitable relativizations, NP contains a C_{=}P-immune set, and ParityP contains a PP^{PH}-immune set. This implies the existence of a C_{=}P^{B}-simple set for some oracle B, which extends results of Balc\'{a}zar et al. [SIAM J.Comp. 14, 1985; RAIRO 22, 1988] and provides the first example of a simple set in a class not known to be contained in PH. Our proof technique requires a circuit lower bound for ``exact counting'' that is derived from Razborov's [Mat. Zametki 41, 1987] lower bound for majority.Comment: 20 page

The hardness of decoding linear codes with preprocessing

The problem of maximum-likelihood decoding of linear block codes is known to be hard. The fact that the problem remains hard even if the code is known in advance, and can be preprocessed for as long as desired in order to device a decoding algorithm, is shown. The hardness is based on the fact that existence of a polynomial-time algorithm implies that the polynomial hierarchy collapses. Thus, some linear block codes probably do not have an efficient decoder. The proof is based on results in complexity theory that relate uniform and nonuniform complexity classes