Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| =?utf-8?B?T1Q6IFByb29mIHRoYXQgUOKJoE5Q?= slkpg4@gmail.com (SLK Mail) (2016-08-09) |
| From: | "SLK Mail" <slkpg4@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Tue, 09 Aug 2016 12:24:46 -0800 |
| Organization: | SLK Systems |
| Injection-Info: | miucha.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="82445"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords: | theory |
| Posted-Date: | 11 Aug 2016 17:05:54 EDT |
A constructive proof is given to show that the complement of non-SLL(k)
testing is not in NP. The proof focuses on the verification step of
determining membership in NP. An instance of the problem is shown to
generate an intractable number of items that must be verified, making the
nondeterministic solution unverifiable in polynomial time. Since
non-SLL(k) testing is well known to be NP-complete, the complement of an
NP-complete problem is not in NP, so it follows that NPb coNP. Here the
abreviation SLL(k) means strong LL(k), not its original usage for simple
LL(k).
http://www.slkpg.com/NPcoNP.html
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.