Complexity measures and decision tree complexity: A survey

Theoretical Computer Science

Volumn 288, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 21-43

  Buhrman, Harry ^a   De Wolf, Ronald ^a,b  

^a CWI   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Complexity measures for Boolean functions; Decision tree complexity; Quantum computing; Randomized computing

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; BOOLEAN FUNCTIONS; COMPUTER SCIENCE; DECISION THEORY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION; QUANTUM THEORY; SET THEORY; THEOREM PROVING; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

QUANTUM COMPUTING; RANDOMIZED COMPUTING;

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY;

EID: 0037048579     PISSN: 03043975     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3975(01)00144-X     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (49)

1. A. Ambainis, A note on quantum black-box complexity of almost all Boolean functions, Inform. Process. Lett. 71(1) (1999) 5-7. Also at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9811080.
2. A. Ambainis, R. de Wolf, Average-case quantum query complexity, in: Proc. 17th Annu. Symp. on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS'2000), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1770, Springer, Berlin, 2000, pp. 133-144, quant-ph/9904079.
3. R. Beals, H. Buhrman, R. Cleve, M. Mosca, R. de Wolf, Quantum lower bounds by polynomials, in: Proc. 39th FOCS, 1998, pp. 352-361, quant-ph/9802049.
4. R. Beigel, The polynomial method in circuit complexity. Proc. 8th IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conf., 1993, pp. 82-95.
5. A. Bernasconi, Sensitivity vs. block sensitivity (an average-case study), Inform. Process. Lett. 59 (3) (1996) 151-157.
6. M. Blum, R. Impagliazzo, Generic oracles and oracle classes (extended abstract), Proc. 28th FOCS, 1987, pp. 118-126.
7. R.B. Boppana, The average sensitivity of bounded-depth circuits. Inform. Proc. Lett. 63 (5) (1997) 257-261.
8. H. Buhrman, R. Cleve, R. de Wolf, Ch. Zalka, Bounds for small-error and zero-error quantum algorithms. Proc. 40th FOCS, 1999, pp. 358-368, cs.CC/9904019.
9. H. Buhrman, R. de Wolf, Communication complexity lower bounds by polynomials, cs.CC/9910010, 1999.
10. S. Cook, C. Dwork, R. Reischuk, Upper and lower time bounds for parallel random access machines without simultaneous writes, SIAM J. Comput. 15 (1986) 87-97.
11. Y. Dodis, S. Khanna, Space-time tradeoffs for graph properties, Proc. 26th ICALP, 1999, pp. 291-300.
12. H. Ehlich, K. Zeller, Schwankung von Polynomen zwischen Gitterpunkten, Math. Z. 86 (1964) 41-44.
13. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, M. Sipser, A limit on the speed of quantum computation in determining parity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998), 5442-5444, quant-ph/9802045.
14. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, M. Sipser, How many functions can be distinguished with k quantum queries? quant-ph/9901012, 7 January 1999.
15. S. Fenner, L. Fortnow, S. Kurtz, L. Li, An oracle builder's toolkit, Proc. 8th IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conf., 1993, pp. 120-131.
16. L. Fortnow, J. Rogers, Complexity limitations on quantum computation, J. Comput. Systems Sci. 59 (2) (1999) 240-252, Earlier version in Complexity'98, cs.CC/9811023.
17. J. von zur Gathen, J.R. Roche, Polynomials with two values, Combinatorica 17 (3) (1997) 345-362.
18. R.L. Graham, D.E. Knuth, O. Patashnik, Concrete Mathematics: A Foundation for Computer Science, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1989.
19. L.K. Grover, A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search, Proc. 28th STOC, 1996, pp. 212-219, quant-ph/9605043.
20. 4/3 lower bound on the randomized complexity of graph properties, Combinatorica 11 (1991) 131-143, Earlier version in Structures'90.
21. J. Hartmanis, L.A. Hemachandra, One-way functions, robustness and the non-isomorphism of NP-complete sets, Proc. 2nd IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conf., 1987, pp. 160-174.
22. R. Heiman, I. Newman, A. Wigderson, On read-once threshold formulae and their randomized decision tree complexity, Theoret. Comput. Sci. 107 (1) (1993) 63-76, Earlier version in Structures'90.
23. R. Heiman, A. Wigderson, Randomized vs. deterministic decision tree complexity for read-once Boolean functions, Comput. Complexity 1 (1991) 311-329, Earlier version in Structures'91.
24. J. Kahn, G. Kalai, N. Linial, The influence of variables on Boolean functions, Proc. 29th FOCS, 1988, pp. 68-80.
25. J. Kahn, M. Saks, D. Sturtevant, A topological approach to evasiveness, Combinatorica 4 (1984) 297-306, Earlier version in FOCS'83.
26. V. King, Lower bounds on the complexity of graph properties, Proc. 20th STOC, 1988, pp. 468-476.
27. L. Lovász, N. Young, Lecture notes on evasiveness of graph properties. Tech. Report, Princeton University, 1994. Available at http://www.uni-paderborn.de/fachbereich/AG/agmadh/WWW/english/scripts.html.
28. M. Minsky, S. Papert, Perceptrons, 2nd expanded ed., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1968, 1988.
29. A. Nayak, F. Wu, The quantum query complexity of approximating the median and related statistics, Proc. 31st STOC, 1999, pp. 384-393, quant-ph/9804066.
30. M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000.
31. N. Nisan, CREW PRAMs and decision trees, SIAM J. Comput. 20 (6) (1991) 999-1007, Earlier version in STOC'89.
32. N. Nisan, M. Szegedy, On the degree of Boolean functions as real polynomials, Comput. Complexity 4 (4) (1994) 301-313, Earlier version in STOC'92.
33. N. Nisan, A. Wigderson, On rank vs. communication complexity, Combinatorica 15 (4) (1995) 557-565, Earlier version in FOCS'94.
34. R. Paturi, On the degree of polynomials that approximate symmetric Boolean functions (preliminary version), Proc. 24th STOC, 1992, pp. 468-474.
35. R. Rivest, S. Vuillemin, On recognizing graph properties from adjacency matrices, Theoret. Comput. Sci. 3 (1976) 371-384.
36. T.J. Rivlin, E.W. Cheney, A comparison of uniform approximations on an interval and a finite subset thereof, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 3 (2) (1966) 311-320.
37. D. Rubinstein, Sensitivity vs. block sensitivity of Boolean functions. Combinatorica. 15 (2) (1995) 297-299.
38. M. Saks, A. Wigderson, Probabilistic Boolean decision trees and the complexity of evaluating game trees, Proc. 27th FOCS, 1986, pp. 29-38.
39. M. Santha, On the Monte Carlo decision tree complexity of read-once formulae, Proc. 6th IEEE Structure in Complexity Theory Conf., 1991, pp. 180-187.
40. Y. Shi, Lower bounds of quantum black-box complexity and degree of approximating polynomials by influence of Boolean variables, Inform. Process. Lett. 75(1-2) (2000) 79-83, quant-ph/9904107.
41. H.U. Simon, A tight Ω(loglog n)-bound on the time for parallel RAM's to compute non-degenerate Boolean functions, in: Symp. on Foundations of Computation Theory, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 158, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 439-444.
42. M. Snir, Lower bounds for probabilistic linear decision trees. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 38 (1985) 69-82.
43. A by random oracles A?, Combinatorica 9 (4) (1989) 385-392.
44. G. Turán, The critical complexity of graph properties, Inform. Process. Lett. 18 (1984) 151-153.
45. W. van Dam, Quantum oracle interrogation: Getting all information for almost half the price, Proc. 39th FOCS, 1998, pp. 362-367, quant-ph/9805006.
46. I. Wegener, The critical complexity of all (monotone) Boolean functions and monotone graph properties, Information and Control, 67 (1985) 212-222.
47. I. Wegener, The Complexity of Boolean Functions. Wiley-Teubner Series in Computer Science, Teubner, Stuttgart, 1987.
48. I. Wegener, L. Zádori, A note on the relations between critical and sensitive complexity, J. Inform. Process. Cybernet. (EIK). 25 (8/9) (1989) 417-421.
49. R. de Wolf, Characterization of non-deterministic quantum query and quantum communication complexity, Proc. 15th IEEE Conf. on Computational Complexity, 2000, pp. 271-278, cs.CC/0001014.