AND and/or OR: Uniform Polynomial-Size Circuits

We investigate the complexity of uniform OR circuits and AND circuits of polynomial-size and depth. As their name suggests, OR circuits have OR gates as their computation gates, as well as the usual input, output and constant (0/1) gates. As is the norm for Boolean circuits, our circuits have multiple sink gates, which implies that an OR circuit computes an OR function on some subset of its input variables. Determining that subset amounts to solving a number of reachability questions on a polynomial-size directed graph (which input gates are connected to the output gate?), taken from a very sparse set of graphs. However, it is not obvious whether or not this (restricted) reachability problem can be solved, by say, uniform AC^0 circuits (constant depth, polynomial-size, AND, OR, NOT gates). This is one reason why characterizing the power of these simple-looking circuits in terms of uniform classes turns out to be intriguing. Another is that the model itself seems particularly natural and worthy of study. Our goal is the systematic characterization of uniform polynomial-size OR circuits, and AND circuits, in terms of known uniform machine-based complexity classes. In particular, we consider the languages reducible to such uniform families of OR circuits, and AND circuits, under a variety of reduction types. We give upper and lower bounds on the computational power of these language classes. We find that these complexity classes are closely related to tallyNL, the set of unary languages within NL, and to sets reducible to tallyNL. Specifically, for a variety of types of reductions (many-one, conjunctive truth table, disjunctive truth table, truth table, Turing) we give characterizations of languages reducible to OR circuit classes in terms of languages reducible to tallyNL classes. Then, some of these OR classes are shown to coincide, and some are proven to be distinct. We give analogous results for AND circuits. Finally, for many of our OR circuit classes, and analogous AND circuit classes, we prove whether or not the two classes coincide, although we leave one such inclusion open.Comment: In Proceedings MCU 2013, arXiv:1309.104

Uniformity is weaker than semi-uniformity for some membrane systems

We investigate computing models that are presented as families of finite computing devices with a uniformity condition on the entire family. Examples of such models include Boolean circuits, membrane systems, DNA computers, chemical reaction networks and tile assembly systems, and there are many others. However, in such models there are actually two distinct kinds of uniformity condition. The first is the most common and well-understood, where each input length is mapped to a single computing device (e.g. a Boolean circuit) that computes on the finite set of inputs of that length. The second, called semi-uniformity, is where each input is mapped to a computing device for that input (e.g. a circuit with the input encoded as constants). The former notion is well-known and used in Boolean circuit complexity, while the latter notion is frequently found in literature on nature-inspired computation from the past 20 years or so. Are these two notions distinct? For many models it has been found that these notions are in fact the same, in the sense that the choice of uniformity or semi-uniformity leads to characterisations of the same complexity classes. In other related work, we showed that these notions are actually distinct for certain classes of Boolean circuits. Here, we give analogous results for membrane systems by showing that certain classes of uniform membrane systems are strictly weaker than the analogous semi-uniform classes. This solves a known open problem in the theory of membrane systems. We then go on to present results towards characterising the power of these semi-uniform and uniform membrane models in terms of NL and languages reducible to the unary languages in NL, respectively.Comment: 28 pages, 1 figur