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.
Bounded alternation qbf is level complete
Statement
For every fixed , truth of prenex Boolean formulas with alternating blocks beginning existentially is -complete under polynomial-time many-one reductions. The universally starting version is -complete. The matrix is a general Boolean formula, empty blocks are allowed, and malformed encodings are rejected.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
All languages are subsets of . Put as in the stated convention. For a fixed integer , means that a deterministic polynomial-time predicate and polynomially bounded, polynomial-time computable lengths satisfy Here is existential for odd and universal for even . Starting universally defines . Write . The level and all polynomials are fixed for a language, not part of the input. Length zero allows the single empty string. Variable-length witnesses can be encoded with a length field and padding; every padded string decodes to a bounded-length string, so universal blocks introduce no invalid-witness exception. (Polynomial hierarchy levels).
For a fixed polynomial-time Boolean predicate , and a polynomial bound on in , one can construct in time polynomial in formulas in 3CNF and in 3DNF such that, for every allowed , Here clauses or terms have at most three literals. Both formula length and are polynomially bounded. (Ph circuit matrix final block encoding).
Let and be languages over finite alphabets. A polynomial-time many-one reduction from to is a total function such that: - is computable by a deterministic Turing machine in polynomial time, and - for every , When such an exists, write (Polynomial-time many-one reductions).
Proof
Parse the encoding deterministically; reject a malformed word. For a well-formed formula, quantify one polynomial-length assignment string per block and evaluate the matrix in polynomial time. Make the parsing test a conjunction in the matrix, so rejection remains valid for either starting polarity. This proves membership even when blocks have length zero.
Given a language at the desired level, take its fixed defining predicate. For each input , apply the pointwise encoding to the whole tuple of quantified strings. If its last block is existential, use and merge into that block. If it is universal, use instead. For every assignment to earlier blocks the replacement has exactly the original truth value, so iterating the outer quantifiers preserves truth in both directions.
There are still blocks and polynomially many symbols; compilation is polynomial-time. It outputs a well-formed instance on every input, with membership equivalent to the original language, which is exactly the required reduction. The construction applies separately to both starting polarities, including .
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
7 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
- Arora–Barak, Computational Complexity, 2007 draft; §5.2.2 Example5.9, pp93–94. (standard reference, not scraped)