Scribd
Upload
15 views2 pages

ECE 606, Fall 2019, Assignment 10: Zhijie Wang, Student ID Number: 20856733 Zhijie - Wang@uwaterloo - Ca November 19, 2019

Uploaded by

hstrybest
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
15 views2 pages

ECE 606, Fall 2019, Assignment 10: Zhijie Wang, Student ID Number: 20856733 Zhijie - Wang@uwaterloo - Ca November 19, 2019

Uploaded by

hstrybest
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/ 2

ECE 606, Fall 2019, Assignment 10

Zhijie Wang, Student ID number: 20856733

[email protected]
November 19, 2019

1. Proof. Suppose s ≤k t and let m1 be the polynomial time reduction function such that x ∈ s if and only
if m1 (s) ∈ t. Similarly, suppose t ≤k u and let m2 be the polynomial time reduction function such that
x ∈ t if and only if m2 (x) ∈ u. Then we can compute m2 ◦ m1 in polynomial time, and x ins if and only
if m2 (m1 (x)) ∈ u.
Therefore, s ≤k u, which means ≤k is transitive.
2. Proof. By construction. We propose the following mapping m. Given an instance < G =< VG , EG >
, H =< VH , EH >> of Iso, we first check if |VG | = |VH | and |EG | = |EH |, then m directly maps < G, H >
as the instance of SubIso, else, removed a vertex from G as G0 , then m maps < G, H > to < G, G0 >.
We first observe that m is computable in time polynomial in the size of G and H.
For the “only if” direction, suppose G and H is isomorphic, then, G and H must have the same size of
vertexes and edges, < G, H > must be a true instance of SubIso.
For the “if” direction, suppose G and H is not isomorphic, then, we do a case analysis. 1) If G and H
has the same size, for the purpose of contradiction, H has a subgraph which is isomorphic to G, then G is
also isomorphic to H because they have the same vertexes and edges numbers, which is a contradiction.
2) If G and H don’t have the same size, for the purpose of contradiction, G0 has a subgraph which is
isomorphic to G, then the size of G0 must not less than G, which is a contradiction.
Therefore, Iso ≤k SubIso.
3. (a) Since HamPath ≤k HamPathStartEnd, if we can prove HamPathStartEnd ≤k HamCycle,
then, HamPath ≤k HamCycle.
Proof. By construction. We propose the following mapping m. Given an instance < G =< V, E >
, a, b > of HamPathStartEnd, introduce two new vertexes x, y ∈ / V . Let V 0 = V ∪ {x, y}, then
introduce three new edges < x, a >, < b, y >, < x, y >. Let G =< V, E 0 >. The function m maps
0

< G, a, b > to < G0 >.


We first observe that m is computable in time polynomial in the size of G.
For the “only if” direction, suppose G has a Hamiltonian path a b, then G0 also have a Hamiltonian
cycle x → a b → y → x.
For the “if” direction, suppose G has no Hamiltonian path from a to b, and for the purpose of
contradiction, G0 has a Hamiltonian cycle. Then, such a cycle must be x → a b → y → x, thus,
G has a Hamiltonian path a b, which is a contradiction.
Therefore, HamPathStartEnd ≤k HamCycle, HamPath ≤k HamCycle.
(b) Since HamPathStartEnd ≤k HamPath, if we can prove HamCycle ≤k HamPathStartEnd,
then, HamCycle ≤k HamPath.
Proof. By construction. We propose the following mapping m. Given an instance < G =< V, E >>
of HamCycle, introduce two new vertexes x, y ∈ / V . Let V 0 = V ∪ {x, y}, then introduce two new
edges < x, s >, < y, r >, where s, r is two connected vertex in V . Let G0 =< V, E 0 >. The function
m maps < G > to < G0 , x, y >.
We first observe that m is computable in time polynomial in the size of G.
For the “only if” direction, suppose G has a Hamiltonian cycle s r → s, then G0 also have a
Hamiltonian path x → s r → y.
For the “if” direction, suppose G has no Hamiltonian cycle, and for the purpose of contradiction, G0
has a Hamiltonian path from x to y. Then, such a path must be x → s r → y, thus, G has a
Hamiltonian cycle s s because s and r are connected, which is a contradiction.

1
Therefore, HamCycle ≤k HamPathStartEnd, HamCycle ≤k HamPath.

4. Proof. First, we define a decision problem UNSAT: given a boolean formula in propositional logic, is it
unsatisfiable?
Then, for every input f of UNSAT, we can simply maps it to ¬f , therefore, SAT ≤c UNSAT because
SAT can be polynomial-time if UNSAT is polynomial-time.
Hence, a formula f is unsatisfiable if and only if ¬f is tautology, therefore, UNSAT can be polynomial-time
if Taut is polynomial-time, UNSAT ≤c Taut.
Finally, SAT ≤c UNSAT ≤c Taut, then, SAT ≤c Taut.

You might also like