Undecidability and Complexity Theory

Great—this is a well-organized and comprehensive set of questions for mastering Undecidability and
Complexity Theory in Theory of Computation. I can help provide structured answers for each section.

Would you like to start with Undecidability, or should we begin with Complexity Theory (P, NP, NP-
Complete)?

Perfect. Let’s start with Undecidability, covering the Short Questions first. Each answer is concise and
to the point, ideal for quick reviews or exams.

✅ Undecidability – Short Questions

1. What is the concept of undecidability in computation?

Undecidability refers to the property of certain computational problems for which no algorithm can be
constructed that always leads to a correct yes/no answer for every input instance.

For example, the Halting Problem is undecidable—there is no Turing machine that can
determine for every other Turing machine and input whether it halts.

2. What is the Church-Turing thesis, and how does it relate to undecidability?

The Church-Turing thesis states that any function that can be effectively computed (i.e., by any
computational model) can also be computed by a Turing machine.

This thesis underpins undecidability because if a problem cannot be solved by a Turing

machine, then—according to the thesis—it cannot be solved by any algorithm at all.

Would you like me to proceed to the Undecidability – Long Questions now?

Great. Here's the next section:

✅ Undecidability – Long Questions

1. Explain the concept of the Halting Problem and why it is considered undecidable.

The Halting Problem asks whether a given Turing machine `M` will halt on a particular input `w`.
Formally:

Given ⟨M, w⟩, will `M` halt on input `w`?

Proof of Undecidability:

Assume there exists a Turing machine `H` that decides the Halting Problem. That is:

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 1/15
 `H(⟨M, w⟩) = YES` if `M` halts on `w`
`H(⟨M, w⟩) = NO` otherwise

Now construct a machine `D` that:

1. Runs `H(⟨M, M⟩)`

2. If `H` says "halts", `D` enters an infinite loop.

3. If `H` says "does not halt", `D` halts.

Now ask what happens when `D` is run on itself: `D(⟨D⟩)`.

If `H` says `D` halts on `⟨D⟩`, then `D` loops forever.

If `H` says `D` does not halt, then `D` halts.

This creates a contradiction. Therefore, `H` cannot exist, and the Halting Problem is undecidable.

2. How does diagonalization help in proving the undecidability of problems? Provide an example.

Diagonalization is a technique introduced by Cantor and adapted by Turing to show the existence of
uncomputable problems.

Key Idea: Suppose we list all Turing machines and construct a language that contradicts the behavior of
each one on its own index. This language cannot be decided by any machine in the list.

Example – Language D:
Let `D = {⟨M⟩ | M is a Turing machine and ⟨M⟩ ∉ L(M)}`

Assume `D` is decidable by a machine `D_TM`. Then ask whether `⟨D_TM⟩ ∈ D`:

If `⟨D_TM⟩ ∈ D`, then by definition `D_TM` does not accept `⟨D_TM⟩`.

If `⟨D_TM⟩ ∉ D`, then `D_TM` accepts `⟨D_TM⟩`.

Contradiction! Hence, `D` is undecidable. This diagonalization argument proves that not all languages
are decidable, and demonstrates the existence of undecidable problems.

Would you like to proceed to the Detailed Questions on Undecidability next?

Excellent. Let's move on to the final section of Undecidability:

✅ Undecidability – Detailed Questions

1. Discuss the universal Turing machine and how it demonstrates the undecidability of certain
problems. How does it relate to the Church-Turing thesis?

A Universal Turing Machine (UTM) is a Turing machine that can simulate any other Turing machine. It
takes as input the encoding of another machine `M` and an input `w`, and simulates the execution of
`M(w)`.

How it demonstrates undecidability:

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 2/15
The UTM shows that Turing machines can be encoded and manipulated like data. This allows self-
referential constructions—like in the Halting Problem—where we ask if a machine halts on its own
description.

Using a UTM, we can define the Halting Problem as:

Does `U(⟨M, w⟩)` halt?

This formulation leads directly to the proof of undecidability through contradiction.

Relation to Church-Turing Thesis:

The Church-Turing thesis states that any effective computation can be performed by a Turing machine.
Since the UTM can simulate any computation, it supports the idea that Turing machines are as
powerful as any computational model. Therefore, undecidability results proved for Turing machines
apply to all algorithms.

2. Provide a proof sketch using diagonalization to demonstrate the undecidability of a specific

problem. How does this method generalize to other undecidable problems?

Problem: Show that the language

`L_d = {⟨M⟩ | ⟨M⟩ ∉ L(M)}`
is undecidable.

Proof Sketch (Diagonalization):

1. Suppose `L_d` is decidable by some Turing machine `D`.

2. Now consider whether `D` accepts its own encoding: `⟨D⟩ ∈ L_d`?

If `⟨D⟩ ∈ L_d`, then by the definition of `L_d`, `D` does not accept `⟨D⟩` → contradiction.
If `⟨D⟩ ∉ L_d`, then `D` accepts `⟨D⟩` → contradiction.

This contradiction implies that no such machine `D` can exist. Hence, `L_d` is undecidable.

Generalization:

The method works by:

Enumerating all possible Turing machines.

Constructing a language that differs from each machine's accepted language on at least one input
(its own index).

Proving that this language lies outside the computable set.

This strategy is the basis for showing uncountably many undecidable languages, and underlies
results like:

The Halting Problem

Rice’s Theorem

Other undecidable decision problems

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 3/15
We’ve now completed the Undecidability section.
Would you like to continue with Complexity Theory (P, NP, NP-Complete) next?

Great! Let's proceed with:

✅ Complexity Theory (P, NP, and NP-Complete) – Short Questions

1. What is the distinction between P and NP in computational theory?

P (Polynomial Time): Class of problems that can be solved in polynomial time by a deterministic
Turing machine.

NP (Nondeterministic Polynomial Time): Class of problems for which a solution can be verified in
polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine.

Key Distinction: In P, solutions are found efficiently; in NP, solutions are verified efficiently.

2. Define an NP-complete problem and give an example.

An NP-complete problem is one that is:

1. In NP.
2. As hard as any other problem in NP (i.e., every NP problem reduces to it in polynomial time).

Example: SAT (Boolean Satisfiability Problem) – Given a Boolean formula, determine if

there exists an assignment of variables that makes the formula true.

Would you like me to move on to the Long Questions under Complexity Theory next?

Excellent! Here's the next part:

✅ Complexity Theory (P, NP, and NP-Complete) – Long Questions

1. Explain Cook’s Theorem and its significance in defining NP-completeness.

Cook’s Theorem (also called the Cook-Levin Theorem) states:

The Boolean Satisfiability Problem (SAT) is NP-complete.

Significance:

It was the first problem proven to be NP-complete.

It provided a foundation for the theory of NP-completeness.

It allows other problems to be proven NP-complete by reducing from SAT.

Proof Idea (sketch):

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 4/15
 Take any nondeterministic polynomial-time Turing machine `M` and input `w`.

Construct a Boolean formula φ that encodes the computation of `M` on `w`.

Show that φ is satisfiable iff `M(w)` accepts.
This reduction is computable in polynomial time.

Thus, solving SAT efficiently would imply P = NP, since all problems in NP could be reduced to SAT and
solved in polynomial time.

2. Discuss the open question of whether P = NP and its importance in computational theory.

The P vs NP question asks:

"Is every problem whose solution can be verified quickly also solvable quickly?"

Formally: Does P = NP?

Importance:

Central unsolved problem in theoretical computer science.

One of the Clay Millennium Prize Problems with a $1 million reward.
If P = NP, many currently hard problems (e.g., in cryptography, logistics, biology) could be solved
efficiently.

If P ≠ NP, it confirms that some problems are inherently difficult to solve, even if verifying a
solution is easy.

Real-World Impact:

Cryptographic security depends on certain problems (like factoring) being in NP but not in P.

Optimization, AI planning, and operations research often deal with NP-complete problems.

Would you like to proceed to the Detailed Questions under Complexity Theory?

Great! Let's dive into the Detailed Questions for Complexity Theory:

✅ Complexity Theory (P, NP, and NP-Complete) – Detailed Questions

1. Explain the complexity classes P, NP, and NP-complete. How do these classes relate to the
solvability and verification of computational problems?

P (Polynomial Time): This class includes problems that can be solved in polynomial time by a
deterministic Turing machine. These problems are considered efficiently solvable.

Example: Sorting algorithms like Merge Sort or Quick Sort, which run in O(n log n).

NP (Nondeterministic Polynomial Time): This class includes problems for which a solution can be
verified in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine. It’s important to note that a solution
does not have to be found in polynomial time, but if one is given, it can be checked quickly.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 5/15
 Example: The Knapsack problem. If someone gives you a solution (e.g., a set of items to put
in a knapsack), you can verify quickly if it fits the weight limit and maximizes value.
NP-complete: These are the hardest problems in NP, meaning that any NP problem can be
reduced to any NP-complete problem in polynomial time. They are both in NP and as hard as any
other problem in NP.
Example: SAT (Boolean satisfiability), where we determine if a Boolean expression can be
made true by setting the variables appropriately.

Relationship between the classes:

P ⊆ NP: If a problem can be solved in polynomial time (P), then it can be verified in polynomial time
(NP).
If P ≠ NP, some problems are hard to solve but easy to verify (NP-complete), while others are both
easy to solve and verify (P).
If P = NP, then every problem in NP can also be solved in polynomial time, collapsing the
distinction between P and NP.

2. Choose an NP-complete problem and describe the process of proving it is NP-complete using
reductions. How does this process apply to other NP-complete problems?

Let's consider SAT (Boolean Satisfiability Problem), the first NP-complete problem, and describe how it
can be proven to be NP-complete.

Process of proving SAT is NP-complete:

1. Prove SAT is in NP:

Given a Boolean formula φ, a solution is a satisfying assignment for the variables. We can
verify this solution by checking if φ evaluates to true, which can be done in polynomial time.

2. Prove SAT is NP-hard:

We show that any problem in NP can be reduced to SAT in polynomial time. This is done by
reducing an arbitrary NP problem to SAT.

The reduction for any arbitrary NP problem (say the Hamiltonian Path problem) is done by
converting the problem’s structure into a Boolean formula that is satisfiable if and only if the
Hamiltonian path exists.

Example Reduction: The 3-Coloring problem (deciding if a graph can be colored with three
colors) can be reduced to SAT by converting the graph’s structure into a Boolean formula that
expresses the constraints for a valid 3-coloring. If this formula is satisfiable, then a valid
coloring exists.

Thus, by showing that SAT is both in NP and NP-hard, we can conclude it is NP-complete.

Generalization to other NP-complete problems:

Once we know that SAT is NP-complete, we can use it as a starting point for reductions to prove that
other problems are NP-complete:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 6/15
 3-CNF-SAT, Clique, Vertex Cover, and many other problems have been proven NP-complete by
reducing SAT (or another NP-complete problem) to them.

This concludes the Complexity Theory (P, NP, and NP-Complete) section. Would you like to move on to
the next topic, Reductions and Proofs?

Let's move on to Reductions and Proofs:

✅ Reductions and Proofs – Short Questions

1. What is the purpose of reductions in computational theory?

Reductions are a technique used to show that one problem is at least as hard as another problem. The
main purpose is to:

Prove NP-completeness: By reducing a known NP-complete problem to another problem, we

show that the second problem is also NP-complete.

Simplify problem analysis: If we can reduce a problem to an easier or already-solved problem, we

can leverage existing solutions.

Classify problems: Reductions help classify problems within complexity classes (e.g., NP-hard, NP-
complete).

2. Define polynomial-time reduction and explain its significance.

A polynomial-time reduction is a transformation from one problem to another such that:

The transformation takes polynomial time.

A solution to the transformed problem gives a solution to the original problem.

Significance:

It allows us to prove that a problem is NP-hard by showing that solving it is no harder than solving
an already-known NP-hard problem.
It helps in comparing the difficulty of problems within the same complexity class (e.g., NP).

✅ Reductions and Proofs – Long Questions

1. Describe how reductions can be used to prove the NP-completeness of a problem. Provide a
concrete example.

To prove a problem X is NP-complete, we need to show:

1. X is in NP: We show that a solution to X can be verified in polynomial time.

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 7/15
 2. X is NP-hard: We reduce a known NP-complete problem (such as SAT) to problem X in polynomial
time.

Example: Proving 3-SAT is NP-complete.

Step 1: Show that 3-SAT is in NP:

Given a Boolean formula, we can verify if a specific assignment satisfies the formula in polynomial
time by substituting values and evaluating the formula.

Step 2: Prove NP-hardness by reduction:

We reduce SAT (which is known to be NP-complete) to 3-SAT.

Given any SAT instance, we convert it into an equivalent 3-SAT instance by transforming each
clause into exactly 3 literals (potentially introducing new variables). This reduction can be
done in polynomial time.

Thus, since 3-SAT is in NP and is NP-hard, it is NP-complete.

2. Explain how the Cook-Levin Theorem (Cook’s Theorem) can be applied to show the NP-
completeness of the SAT problem.

Cook’s Theorem proves that SAT is NP-complete by showing that:

1. SAT is in NP: We can verify a solution (an assignment of variables) to a Boolean formula in
polynomial time.

2. SAT is NP-hard: Cook showed that every problem in NP can be reduced to SAT in polynomial time.

Proof Outline:

Let `P` be a problem in NP.

Any problem in NP can be computed by a nondeterministic Turing machine `M`.

We construct a Boolean formula φ that represents the computation of `M` on an input string. The
formula φ is satisfiable if and only if `M` accepts the input string.

Thus, solving SAT would give us a solution to every NP problem, proving SAT is NP-complete.

✅ Reductions and Proofs – Detailed Questions

1. Discuss the process of using problem reduction to prove that one problem is NP-complete. How
does the concept of polynomial-time reduction help in this context?

To prove that a problem P is NP-complete, we must use a reduction from a known NP-complete problem
Q (usually SAT or another NP-complete problem) to P.

Process:

1. Show that P is in NP:

We need to demonstrate that a solution to P can be verified in polynomial time.

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 8/15
 2. Reduce Q to P in polynomial time:

We transform any instance of Q (known NP-complete problem) into an instance of P. This

transformation must take polynomial time.

We then show that the original instance of Q is a yes-instance if and only if the transformed
instance of P is a yes-instance.

The reduction ensures that if we can solve P in polynomial time, we can solve Q in polynomial time as
well, which means P is at least as hard as Q.

Polynomial-time reduction means the transformation from one problem to another can be
done in polynomial time. This is crucial because if we could reduce an NP-complete problem
to P in polynomial time, solving P would effectively solve all NP-complete problems.

2. Using Rice’s theorem, demonstrate how to prove that a given property of languages is
undecidable. Provide a detailed example of such a proof.

Rice’s Theorem states that any nontrivial property of the language accepted by a Turing machine is
undecidable. A nontrivial property is one that is true for some Turing machines and false for others.

Example: Proving that the property "L(M) is empty" is undecidable.

Problem: Determine whether the language L(M ) accepted by a Turing machine M is empty (i.e.,
does M accept no strings?).

Step 1: Property is nontrivial:

There are Turing machines whose language is empty (e.g., a machine that rejects all inputs).
There are Turing machines whose language is non-empty (e.g., a machine that accepts at
least one string).

Step 2: Apply Rice’s theorem:

Since the property "L(M) is empty" is nontrivial, Rice's theorem guarantees that it is
undecidable.

Thus, no algorithm can decide whether the language of an arbitrary Turing machine is empty.

This concludes the Reductions and Proofs section. Would you like to continue with Turing Machines
(TM) and Computability next?

Let's move on to Turing Machines (TM) and Computability:

✅ Turing Machines (TM) and Computability – Short Questions

1. What is a Turing machine and why is it considered a model of computation?

A Turing machine (TM) is a theoretical model of computation that consists of:

An infinite tape divided into cells, each holding a symbol from a finite alphabet.

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 9/15
 A head that can read and write symbols on the tape and move left or right.

A state register that holds the current state of the machine.

A transition function that dictates the machine's behavior based on the current state and the
symbol being read from the tape.

It is considered a model of computation because it can simulate the logic of any computer algorithm.
The Church-Turing thesis states that anything computable by an algorithm can be computed by a
Turing machine, making it a fundamental model of computation.

2. How do Turing-recognizable and Turing-decidable languages differ?

Turing-decidable languages: A language is Turing-decidable (or recursive) if there exists a Turing

machine that halts on all inputs and decides whether a string belongs to the language. In other
words, the Turing machine always halts with a "yes" or "no" answer.

Example: The language of even-length binary strings is Turing-decidable because a Turing

machine can easily decide whether the length of a string is even or odd by counting the
symbols.
Turing-recognizable languages: A language is Turing-recognizable (or recursively enumerable)
if there exists a Turing machine that will halt and accept any string in the language, but might run
forever for strings not in the language.

Example: The language of all valid programs in a programming language is Turing-

recognizable, but not necessarily decidable, because the machine may run indefinitely on
some invalid programs (e.g., if it gets stuck in an infinite loop).

✅ Turing Machines (TM) and Computability – Long Questions

1. Describe the basic model of Turing machines and how it differs from finite automata. How does
it contribute to the understanding of computational power?

A Turing machine consists of an infinite tape, a head for reading/writing, a state register, and a
transition function, while a finite automaton (FA) has a finite state register and no memory beyond the
state it is currently in. The key differences are:

Memory: Turing machines have an infinite tape that serves as unbounded memory, while finite
automata have no memory beyond the current state.
Computation Power: Turing machines can solve a broader class of problems, including those that
require memory or involve unbounded input, like context-free languages and beyond. In contrast,
finite automata can only recognize regular languages, which are a strict subset of the languages
recognized by Turing machines.

Contribution to Computational Power:

The Turing machine is the most powerful model of computation because it can simulate any
algorithmic process, making it the basis for the Church-Turing thesis. This thesis asserts that any

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 10/15
 function that can be computed algorithmically can be computed by a Turing machine.

2. What are Turing-decidable and Turing-recognizable languages? Provide examples of each and
discuss their significance in computability theory.

Turing-decidable languages:

These are languages for which a Turing machine exists that will always halt with an answer
(either "yes" or "no") on whether an input string belongs to the language.

Example: The language of strings over the alphabet {0, 1} that have an even number of 1's.
A Turing machine can process this string and decide if the condition is met in finite time.

Significance: These languages are the easiest to work with in terms of algorithmic processing
because there’s always a definite answer and the computation always terminates.

Turing-recognizable languages:

These are languages where a Turing machine can accept any string in the language (i.e., it
halts and accepts) but may run forever on strings not in the language.

Example: The language of all valid programs in a programming language. A Turing machine
can recognize whether a string is a valid program, but for invalid programs, the machine may
run indefinitely.

Significance: These languages are harder to work with than Turing-decidable languages
because we may not get an answer for all inputs, especially for strings not in the language.

✅ Turing Machines (TM) and Computability – Detailed Questions

1. Explain the relationship between Turing machines and undecidable problems. How does the
model of Turing machines lead to the concept of undecidability in computational theory?

A problem is undecidable if there is no algorithm (or Turing machine) that can solve the problem for all
inputs. Turing machines are central to understanding undecidability because they provide the formal
foundation for identifying which problems can or cannot be solved algorithmically.

Key points:

Undecidability: A problem is undecidable if no Turing machine can decide it for all possible inputs
(i.e., the machine might run forever on some inputs).
Halting Problem: One of the most famous undecidable problems is the Halting Problem, which
asks whether a given Turing machine will halt on a given input. Alan Turing proved that there is no
general algorithm (Turing machine) that can decide this for all possible machines and inputs.

The existence of undecidable problems arises from the fact that a Turing machine, despite its
computational power, is limited in what it can compute. The Halting Problem illustrates this limitation,
showing that there are problems for which no Turing machine can provide an answer.

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 11/15
2. Using the universal Turing machine, explain its role in demonstrating the computational limits
of different languages and its application in proving undecidability.

A universal Turing machine (UTM) is a special Turing machine that can simulate any other Turing
machine. It takes as input the description of another Turing machine and an input string, and then
simulates the behavior of the described machine on the input string.

Role in demonstrating computational limits:

The UTM can simulate the operation of any Turing machine, showing that all problems solvable by
any Turing machine are equivalent in power. This leads to the understanding that there are limits
to what can be computed by any Turing machine, demonstrating undecidability and
computational limits.

Application in proving undecidability:

The concept of a universal Turing machine is key to proving the Halting Problem undecidable.
Turing showed that if we could decide the halting problem for any Turing machine, we could
construct a machine that simulates any UTM. However, this leads to a contradiction, showing that
the Halting Problem is undecidable.

This concludes the Turing Machines (TM) and Computability section. Would you like to move on to
Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice’s Theorem, Cook’s Theorem) next?

Let's move on to Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice's Theorem, Cook's Theorem):

✅ Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice’s Theorem, Cook’s Theorem) – Short

Questions

1. What is Rice's theorem and how does it relate to undecidability?

Rice's theorem states that any nontrivial property of the languages recognized by Turing machines is
undecidable. In other words, if there is a property that is true for some Turing machines and false for
others, then there is no general algorithm (Turing machine) that can decide whether an arbitrary Turing
machine recognizes a language with that property.

Example: The property of whether a Turing machine halts on all inputs is undecidable. There is no
Turing machine that can decide this for all machines.

Rice's theorem highlights the limits of what can be decided about Turing machines, reinforcing the
concept of undecidability in computational theory.

2. Define Cook’s Theorem and its importance in computational complexity.

Cook’s Theorem (also known as Cook-Levin Theorem) states that the Boolean satisfiability problem
(SAT) is NP-complete. This was the first problem shown to be NP-complete, meaning that:

SAT is in NP (its solution can be verified in polynomial time).

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 12/15
 Every problem in NP can be reduced to SAT in polynomial time, meaning that if you can solve SAT
efficiently, you can solve every problem in NP efficiently.

Importance: Cook's Theorem is foundational in computational complexity because it introduced the

concept of NP-completeness. It paved the way for the classification of many other problems as NP-
complete, and understanding these problems is central to the P vs NP question.

✅ Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice’s Theorem, Cook’s Theorem) – Long

Questions

1. Discuss Rice’s theorem and provide an example where it is applied to show undecidability of a
language property.

Rice’s theorem applies to properties of the languages that are recognized by Turing machines. The
theorem states that if a property of the language is nontrivial (true for some languages and false for
others), then there is no algorithm (Turing machine) to decide whether a given Turing machine
recognizes a language with that property.

Example:

Consider the property "the language recognized by a Turing machine is infinite". The problem of
determining whether a Turing machine recognizes an infinite language is undecidable. We can prove
this by reduction from the Halting Problem. If we could decide this property, we could determine
whether a Turing machine halts on a given input by using the fact that a Turing machine that halts on all
inputs would recognize a finite language, and a Turing machine that doesn’t halt on all inputs would
recognize an infinite language.
Thus, Rice’s theorem helps establish that certain properties of Turing machine languages are
undecidable.

2. Explain Cook’s theorem in detail. How does it prove that the SAT problem is NP-complete?

Cook’s Theorem shows that the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) is NP-complete. Here's how it
works:

SAT Problem: Given a Boolean formula, the problem is to determine if there exists a truth
assignment to the variables that makes the formula true.
Cook's Contribution: Cook proved that SAT is the first problem in NP that is NP-complete, which
means:

SAT is in NP: A given truth assignment can be verified in polynomial time.

NP-completeness: Any other problem in NP can be reduced to SAT in polynomial time,
meaning that solving SAT is at least as hard as any other problem in NP.

Proof Outline:

Cook’s proof involves showing that any problem in NP can be transformed into an instance of the SAT
problem. The key idea is that any nondeterministic Turing machine computation can be described by a

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 13/15
Boolean formula. By constructing such a formula for a given NP problem, Cook showed that solving SAT
is equivalent to solving any problem in NP. This proves that SAT is NP-complete.

✅ Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice’s Theorem, Cook’s Theorem) –

Detailed Questions

1. Provide a proof sketch using Rice’s theorem to demonstrate that a specific property of
languages is undecidable. Discuss the implications of this theorem on language theory.

To prove a property undecidable using Rice’s theorem, we follow these steps:

1. Identify a nontrivial property: The property must be one that holds for some languages and not
for others. For example, the property "the language recognized by the Turing machine is empty" is
nontrivial because some Turing machines recognize empty languages (e.g., a machine that never
halts) and some recognize non-empty languages (e.g., a machine that accepts some strings).

2. Apply Rice’s theorem: According to Rice’s theorem, this property is undecidable because it is
nontrivial. There is no algorithm that can decide, for every Turing machine, whether it recognizes
an empty language.

Implications of Rice's Theorem:

Rice’s theorem has far-reaching implications in language theory. It tells us that many properties of
Turing machine languages (such as whether the language is infinite, finite, or has a certain number of
strings) are undecidable. This limits the scope of problems we can solve algorithmically about Turing
machines and their languages.

2. Using Cook’s Theorem, explain how the SAT problem was proven to be NP-complete. What role
do polynomial-time reductions play in this proof?

Cook’s Theorem proves that the SAT problem is NP-complete by showing two things:

1. SAT is in NP: Given a truth assignment, we can check if it satisfies the Boolean formula in
polynomial time, thus proving that SAT is in NP.
2. NP-completeness of SAT: Cook showed that every problem in NP can be reduced to SAT in
polynomial time. This is done by constructing a polynomial-time reduction from any problem in NP
to the SAT problem. Specifically, Cook showed that any nondeterministic Turing machine
computation can be captured by a Boolean formula, and solving this formula for satisfiability is
equivalent to solving the NP problem.

Role of Polynomial-Time Reductions:

The polynomial-time reduction is crucial in Cook's proof. It shows that if we can solve SAT efficiently, we
can solve any NP problem efficiently. This reduction process transforms any NP problem into an instance
of SAT, demonstrating the equivalence of the complexity of SAT to every other problem in NP.

This concludes the Undecidability and Complexity Proofs (Rice’s Theorem, Cook’s Theorem) section.
Would you like to proceed to the next section or review any part in detail?

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 14/15
Here are the two separate tables as requested:

1. Decidability & Undecidability for all languages in Theory of Computation

Language Class Decidable Undecidable

Regular Languages Yes No
Context-Free Languages (CFLs) Yes (for membership) No (for equivalence, universality)

Context-Sensitive Languages Yes No

Turing-Decidable Languages Yes No
Turing-Recognizable Languages Yes (in some cases) Yes (if not decidable)

Recursive Enumerable (RE) Yes Yes (in some cases)

Recursively Enumerable (R.E.) Yes Yes
Unrestricted Languages Yes No

2. Closure Properties for all languages in Theory of Computation

Star
Language
Union Intersection Concatenation (Kleene Complement Reversal Homomorp
Class
Closure)
Regular
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Languages
Context-Free
Languages Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
(CFLs)
Context-
Sensitive Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Languages
Turing-
Decidable Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Languages

Turing-
Recognizable Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Languages

These tables summarize the decidability and undecidability of different language classes and the
closure properties of various language classes in the theory of computation. Let me know if you need
any additional details or clarification on any points!

Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 15/15