Skip to main content
Log in

A note on dense and nondense families of complexity classes

  • Published:
Mathematical systems theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

In a model for a measure of computational complexity, Ф, for a partial recursive functiont, letR Ф t denote all partial recursive functions having the same domain ast and computable within timet. Let ΣФ = {R Ф t |t is recursive} and let ΩФ = {\(R_{\Phi _i } \)i is actually the running time function of a computation}. ΣФ and ΩФ are partially ordered under set-theoretic inclusion. These partial orderings have been extensively investigated by Borodin, Constable and Hopcroft in [3]. In this paper we present a simple uniform proof of some of their results. For example, we give a procedure for easily calculating a model of computational complexity Ф for which ΣФ is not dense while ΩФ is dense. In our opinion, our technique is so transparent that it indicates that certain questions of density are not intrinsically interesting for general abstract measures of computational complexity, Ф. (This is not to say that similar questions are necessarily uninteresting for specific models.)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Manuel Blum, A machine-independent theory of the complexity of recursive functions,J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 14 (1967), 332–336.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allan Borodin, Complexity classes of recursive functions and the existence of complexity gaps,ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Assoc. Comput. Mach., New York, 1969, pp. 67–78.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Borodin, R. Constable andJ. Hopcroft, Dense and non-dense families of complexity classes,IEEE Tenth Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, 1969, pp. 7–19.

  4. Robert L. Constable, The operator gap,IEEE Tenth Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, 1969, pp. 20–26.

  5. E. McCreight andA. Meyer, Classes of computable functions defined by bounds on computation,ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, Assoc. Comput. Mach., New York, 1969, pp. 79–88.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Michael Rabin, Real-time computation,Israel J. Math. 1 (1963), 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Paul Young, Toward a theory of enumerations,J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 16 (1969), 328–348.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported by NSF Research Grants GP6120 and GJ27127.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Young, P. A note on dense and nondense families of complexity classes. Math. Systems Theory 5, 66–70 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01691468

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01691468

Keywords