How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
A bounded computation tableau for a nondeterministic Turing-machine run
Definition
Fix a nondeterministic one-tape Turing machine and an input word . Suppose , every branch of on halts within steps, and no branch visits a tape cell beyond position . A bounded computation tableau for on is a array whose rows encode one computation branch of on , padded after halting if necessary:
- row is the initial configuration on input ,
- each later row is obtained from the previous row by one legal transition of , or else repeats the previous row unchanged when that previous row is already halting,
- and each row contains exactly one distinguished state-tagged tape symbol, marking the head position and current state.
The tableau is accepting when some row is an accepting configuration.
Remarks
-
The one-tape hypothesis is what makes one state-tagged symbol sufficient to record the unique head position in each row.
-
The bound ensures that row has room for the entire input; the width and height are both polynomial in once is polynomial.
-
The repeated-row convention is the standard way to fit an accepting or rejecting branch of length at most into a fixed tableau.
-
The tableau records one branch, not the whole nondeterministic tree.
Depends on
Used by
- A machine with two branches shows that one satisfying tableau need not encode every branch Counterexample
- Local 2x3 tableau windows and legality Definition
- FALSE: the Cook-Levin reduction enumerates all nondeterministic branches False statement
- A tableau is legal exactly when the start row is correct and every local window is legal Lemma
- For a fixed machine, each tableau cell ranges over a constant-size extended alphabet Lemma
- The Cook--Levin construction can be made parsimonious Lemma
- The Cook-Levin formula is satisfiable if and only if an accepting bounded tableau exists Lemma
- The Cook-Levin reduction map is computable in polynomial time Lemma
- The exactly-one-symbol constraints have polynomial size Lemma
- The start, accept, and transition constraints have polynomial size Lemma
Dependency tree · two levels
9 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- MIT 18.404J / 6.840J, Lecture 16: Cook-Levin Theorem (standard reference, not scraped)