CSC 341: April 9, 2007

From CSWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Previous Lecture Next Lecture

Notes for the class session

Definition 5.20: Language A is mapping reducible to language B, written A \le_m B, if there is a computable function f: \Sigma^* \rightarrow \Sigma^*, where for every \omega, \omega \in A \Longleftrightarrow f(\omega) \in B. The function f is called the reduction of A to B.

Proving A_\mathsf{TM} \not\le_m E_\mathsf{TM}. (Suppose A_\mathsf{TM} \le_m E_\mathsf{TM}.)

  1. The oracle Turing machine A^\mathsf{TM} is recognizable.
  2. A_\mathsf{TM} is Turing recognizable. {\overline E_\mathsf{TM}} is Turing recognizable, so (since E_\mathsf{TM} is not decidable), E_\mathsf{TM} is not Turing recognizeable.
  3. Suppose A_\mathsf{TM} \le_m EQ_\mathsf{TM}. Then A_\mathsf{TM} \le_m {\overline E_\mathsf{TM}}, and A_\mathsf{TM} is not Turing recognizable, a contradiction.

Therefore, A_\mathsf{TM} \not\le_m E_\mathsf{TM}.

If A \le_m B and B \le_m C, then A \le_m C.

If A is Turing recognizable and A \le_m {\overline A} then {\overline A} \le_m {\overline {\overline A}}. {\overline {\overline A}} is simply A, so {\overline A} \le_m A. By Theorem 5.28, {\overline A} is Turing recognizable. So A is co-Turing recognizable. Hence, by Theorem 4.22, A is decidable.

Study questions

  1. Is mapping reducibility a reflexive relation? Justify your answer.
  2. Show that every language that is mapping-reducible to ATM is Turing-computable.
  3. Show that HALTTM is mapping-reducible to REGULARTM.

Proposed Solutions

  1. Yes, mapping reducibility is reflexive because of the existence of the identity function.



Previous Lecture Next Lecture

Front Door

Personal tools