1991
DOI: 10.1137/0220053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

PP is as Hard as the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy

Abstract: In this paper, two interesting complexity classes, PP and P, are compared with PH, the polynomial-time hierarchy. It is shown that every set in PH is polynomial-time Turing reducible to a set in PP, and PH is included in BP. 0)P. As a consequence of the results, it follows that PP PH (or 03P___ PH) implies a collapse of PH. A stronger result is also shown: every set in PP(PH) is polynomial-time Turing reducible to a set in PP.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
373
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 588 publications
(379 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
5
373
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…If this is the case, then SampP = SampBQP would imply P #P = BPP NP , which in turn would imply PH = BPP NP by Toda's Theorem [9]. Or to put it differently: we could rule out a polynomial-time classical algorithm to sample the output distribution of a quantum computer, under the sole assumption that the polynomial hierarchy is infinite.…”
Section: Our Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If this is the case, then SampP = SampBQP would imply P #P = BPP NP , which in turn would imply PH = BPP NP by Toda's Theorem [9]. Or to put it differently: we could rule out a polynomial-time classical algorithm to sample the output distribution of a quantum computer, under the sole assumption that the polynomial hierarchy is infinite.…”
Section: Our Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clearly NP ⊆ P #P but it was not clear if Σ p 2 ⊆ P #P . However, Toda [71] proved the somewhat surprising result that PH ⊆ P #P . It is not know if this containments is proper.…”
Section: #Pmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This conjecture is relevant because of the continuing interest in lower bounds for the permanent. Computing the permanent is #P-hard [26] and is hard for the entire polynomial-time hierarchy [24]. Schrijver [20] was the first to give an interesting lower bound for the permanent in the form per(Ã) ≥ ∏1≤i≤n 1≤ j≤n (1 − a i, j ), whereà is the matrix whose (i, j) th entry is a i, j (1−a i, j ).…”
Section: Permanent Of Doubly Stochastic Matricesmentioning
confidence: 99%