P vs NP: Computational Complexity Relationships
1. Origin of the P Complexity Class
2. NP and the Cook-Levin Theorem
3. The "P Increasing" Concept
If "P is increasing" means we are discovering more efficient algorithms that move problems from higher complexity classes into P (e.g., the AKS algorithm showing primality testing ∈ P in 2002), this demonstrates algorithmic progress. However, this gradual expansion of P does not necessarily imply all NP problems will eventually be in P, unless SAT itself is shown to be in P.
4. Intersection of P and NP
If SAT ∈ P, then NP ⊆ P by the Cook-Levin theorem. Since P ⊆ NP is always true (any efficiently solvable problem is efficiently verifiable), this would mean P = NP. In this scenario, the intersection P ∩ NP would equal NP, and NP-complete problems like SAT would reside in this intersection.
5. Current Understanding
At present, SAT is not known to be in P, and most complexity theorists believe P ≠ NP. Therefore, the current relationship is:
- P ⊆ NP (proper inclusion unknown)
- NP-complete problems are believed to be outside P
- P ∩ NP-complete = ∅ unless P = NP
No comments:
Post a Comment