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.
Ph adaptive oracle transcript normal form
Statement
For fixed and , every nondeterministic polynomial-time -oracle computation has a definition. More generally, for a fixed total base oracle and , polynomial nondeterministic access to both and has a definition.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
Fix a total language . An oracle machine writes a query word and receives its membership bit in in one answer step. Query writing counts toward time and the query tape toward space. A polynomial time clock bounds every branch for every oracle. and are deterministic and nondeterministic polynomial-time oracle classes, respectively; the latter equivalently uses a polynomial-length witness and a deterministic polynomial-time -oracle verifier. Use the conventions of the stated convention and the stated convention. For and , replace the deterministic predicate in the stated convention by a predicate; level zero is . Define by deterministic polynomial space under the charged-query convention. For a language class , and . Finally . With a fixed base oracle, a machine may query both and a language ; encode this by the tagged union . (Relativized complexity class).
For each fixed , both and are closed under polynomial-time many-one preimages and polynomially many uniformly indexed conjunctions and disjunctions. Precisely, if the language of pairs lies in the class and for a polynomial-time computable polynomial bound , then both “every such ” and “some such ” define languages in that class. Complements interchange and , and each is contained in both classes at level . These assertions also hold with one fixed base oracle. (Ph quantifier block closure).
Proof
Use the oracle-independent polynomial clock to bound the branch string, number and lengths of queries, and the entire transcript. Guess in a first existential block a branch and all answers to queries. Replay the machine using these answers, making any calls directly; reject if the replay does not accept. Thus the replay test is in .
Write with . For each guessed YES answer, guess its in the first block too; its remaining condition starts universally and has blocks. For each NO answer, use the complementary -block universal-first formula. Pad YES conditions with an unused last block, and combine the conditions in parallel into alternating universal-first blocks by tuple conjunction closure. Unused transcript slots impose the constant true condition. At , a YES condition has no remaining quantified variable.
An actually accepting branch supplies its correct transcript and YES witnesses, so the constructed formula is true. Conversely a true formula certifies every YES and every NO answer, and the replay is therefore an actual accepting branch. Tuple lengths are polynomial because both query count and query length are polynomially bounded. Prefixing the guessed first block gives exactly alternating blocks over . For the unrelativized assertion take .
Depends on
Used by
- Elementary high low identities Proposition
- Quantifier and oracle characterizations of ph Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
5 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
- Goldreich, Computational Complexity lecture notes; Lecture9 Theorem9.9, pp105–107, proof in both directions. (standard reference, not scraped)