Scribd
Upload
63 views6 pages

6.006 Introduction To Algorithms: Mit Opencourseware

This document summarizes a lecture on algorithms and complexity. It discusses searching algorithms like breadth-first search and depth-first search, and applications like job scheduling and topological sorting. It then covers intractable problems, defining the complexity classes P, NP, and NP-completeness. Key problems discussed include the halting problem, the Rubik's Cube, sorting an n×n grid, and Tetris, all of which are NP-complete or harder.

Uploaded by

raw.junk
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
63 views6 pages

6.006 Introduction To Algorithms: Mit Opencourseware

This document summarizes a lecture on algorithms and complexity. It discusses searching algorithms like breadth-first search and depth-first search, and applications like job scheduling and topological sorting. It then covers intractable problems, defining the complexity classes P, NP, and NP-completeness. Key problems discussed include the halting problem, the Rubik's Cube, sorting an n×n grid, and Tetris, all of which are NP-complete or harder.

Uploaded by

raw.junk
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

MIT OpenCourseWare

http://ocw.mit.edu

6.006 Introduction to Algorithms


Spring 2008

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms.

Lecture 14

Searching III

6.006 Spring 2008

Lecture 14: Searching III: Toplogical Sort and


NP-completeness
Lecture Overview: Search 3 of 3 & NP-completeness
BFS vs. DFS
job scheduling
topological sort
intractable problems
P, NP, NP-completeness

Readings
CLRS, Sections 22.4 and 34.1-34.3 (at a high level)

Recall:
Breadth-First Search (BFS): level by level
Depth-First Search (DFS): backtrack as necc.

both O(V + E) worst-case time = optimal

BFS computes shortest paths (min. edges)


DFS is a bit simpler & has useful properties

Lecture 14

Searching III

6.006 Spring 2008

Job Scheduling:
Given Directed Acylic Graph (DAG), where vertices represent tasks & edges represent
dependencies, order tasks without violating dependencies

8
G

4
A

E
6

Figure 1: Dependence Graph

Source
Source = vertex with no incoming edges
= schedulable at beginning (A,G,I)
Attempt
BFS from each source:

- from A finds H,B,C,F


- from D finds C, E, F
- from G finds H

need to merge
- costly

Figure 2: BFS-based Scheduling

Lecture 14

Searching III

6.006 Spring 2008

Topological Sort
Reverse of DFS nishing times (time at which nodes outgoing edges nished)
Exercise: prove that no constraints are violated

Intractability
DFS & BFS are worst-case optimal if problem is really graph search (to look at graph)
what if graph . . .
is implicit?
has special structure?
is innite?
The rst 2 characteristics (implicitness and special structure) apply to the Rubiks Cube

problem.

The third characteristic (inniteness) applies to the Halting Problem.

Halting Problem:
Given a computer program, does it ever halt (stop)?
decision problem: answer is YES or NO
UNDECIDABLE: no algorithm solves this problem (correctly in nite time on all inputs)
Most decision problems are undecidable:

program binary string nonneg. integer


decision problem = a function from binary strings to {YES,NO}. Binary strings refer
to nonneg. integers while {YES,NO} {0,1}
innite sequence of bits real number
: non assignment of unique nonneg. integers to real numbers ( uncountable)
= not nearly enough programs for all problems & each program solves only one
problem
= almost all problems cannot be solved

Lecture 14

Searching III

6.006 Spring 2008

n n n Rubiks cube:
n = 2 or 3 is easy algorithmically: O(1) time
in practice, n = 3 still unsolved
graph size grows exponentially with n
solvability decision question is easy (parity check)
nding shortest solution: UNSOLVED
n n Chess:

Given n n board & some conguration of pieces, can WHITE force a win?

can be formulated as () graph search


every algorithm needs time exponential in n:

EXPTIME-complete [Fraenkel & Lichtenstein 1981]

n2 1 Puzzle:
Given n n grid with n2 1 pieces, sort pieces by sliding (see Figure 3).
similar to Rubiks cube:
solvability decision question is easy (parity check)
nding shortest solution: NP-COMPLETE [Ratner & Warmuth 1990]

10

11

12

13

14

15

Figure 3: Puzzle

Lecture 14

Searching III

6.006 Spring 2008

Tetris:
Given current board conguration & list of pieces to come, stay alive
NP-COMPLETE

[Demaine, Hohenberger, Liben-Nowell 2003]

P, NP, NP-completeness
P

= all (decision) problems solvable by a polynomial (O(nc )) time algorithm (ecient)

NP = all decision problems whose YES answers have short (polynomial-length) proofs
checkable by a polynomial-time algorithm
e.g., Rubiks cube and n2 1 puzzle:
is there a solution of length k?
YES = easy-to-check short proof(moves)
Tetris NP
but we conjecture Chess not NP (winning strategy is big- exponential in n)
P = NP: Big conjecture (worth $1,000,000) generating proofs/solutions is harder than
checking them
NP-complete = in NP & NP-hard
NP-hard = as hard as every problem in NP

= every problem in NP can be eciently converted into this problem

= if this problem P then P = NP (so probably this problem not in P)

You might also like