当前位置: X-MOL 学术arXiv.cs.CC › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
On the complexity of detecting hazards
arXiv - CS - Computational Complexity Pub Date : 2020-06-18 , DOI: arxiv-2006.10592
Balagopal Komarath and Nitin Saurabh

Detecting and eliminating logic hazards in Boolean circuits is a fundamental problem in logic circuit design. We show that there is no $O(3^{(1-\epsilon)n} \text{poly}(s))$ time algorithm, for any $\epsilon > 0$, that detects logic hazards in Boolean circuits of size $s$ on $n$ variables under the assumption that the strong exponential time hypothesis is true. This lower bound holds even when the input circuits are restricted to be formulas of depth four. We also present a polynomial time algorithm for detecting $1$-hazards in DNF (or, $0$-hazards in CNF) formulas. Since $0$-hazards in DNF (or, $1$-hazards in CNF) formulas are easy to eliminate, this algorithm can be used to detect whether a given DNF or CNF formula has a hazard in practice.

中文翻译:

关于检测危害的复杂性

检测和消除布尔电路中的逻辑危险是逻辑电路设计中的一个基本问题。我们证明没有 $O(3^{(1-\epsilon)n} \text{poly}(s))$ 时间算法,对于任何 $\epsilon > 0$,可以检测布尔电路中的逻辑风险在强指数时间假设成立的假设下,在 $n$ 个变量上大小 $s$。即使当输入电路被限制为深度四的公式时,这个下界也成立。我们还提出了一种多项式时间算法,用于检测 DNF 中的 $1$-风险(或 CNF 中的 $0$-风险)公式。由于 DNF 中的 $0$-hazards(或 CNF 中的 $1$-hazards)公式很容易消除,因此该算法可用于检测给定的 DNF 或 CNF 公式在实践中是否存在危害。
更新日期:2020-06-19
down
wechat
bug