Objectives

• P, NP, NP-Hard and NP-Complete

• Solving 3-CNF Sat problem
• Discussion of Gate Questions

2
 Types of Problems
• Trackable
• Intrackable
• Decision
• Optimization

Trackable : Problems that can be solvable

in a reasonable(polynomial) time.
Intrackable : Some problems are
intractable, as they grow large, we are
unable to solve them in reasonable time.
3
 Tractability
• What constitutes reasonable time?
– Standard working definition: polynomial time
– On an input of size n the worst-case running
time is O(nk) for some constant k
– O(n2), O(n3), O(1), O(n lg n), O(2n), O(nn), O(n!)
– Polynomial time: O(n2), O(n3), O(1), O(n lg n)
– Not in polynomial time: O(2n), O(nn), O(n!)
• Are all problems solvable in polynomial
time?
– No: Turing‛s “Halting Problem” is not solvable
by any computer, no matter how much time is
given.
4
Optimization/Decision Problems

• Optimization Problems
– An optimization problem is one which asks,
“What is the optimal solution to problem X?”
– Examples:
• 0-1 Knapsack
• Fractional Knapsack
• Minimum Spanning Tree
• Decision Problems
– An decision problem is one with yes/no answer
– Examples:
• Does a graph G have a MST of weight ≤ W?

5
Optimization/Decision Problems

• An optimization problem tries to find an optimal solution

• A decision problem tries to answer a yes/no question
• Many problems will have decision and optimization versions
– Eg: Traveling salesman problem
• optimization: find hamiltonian cycle of minimum
weight
• decision: is there a hamiltonian cycle of weight ≤ k

6
P, NP, NP-Hard, NP-Complete
-Definitions

7
 The Class P

P: the class of problems that have polynomial-time

deterministic algorithms.
– That is, they are solvable in O(p(n)), where p(n) is a
polynomial on n
– A deterministic algorithm is (essentially) one that always
computes the correct answer

8
 Sample Problems in P
• Fractional Knapsack
• MST
• Sorting
• Others?

9
 The class NP
NP: the class of decision problems that are solvable in
polynomial time on a nondeterministic machine (or with
a nondeterministic algorithm)
– (A determinstic computer is what we know)
– A nondeterministic computer is one that can “guess” the right
answer or solution
• Think of a nondeterministic computer as a parallel
machine that can freely spawn an infinite number of
processes
• Thus NP can also be thought of as the class of
problems “whose solutions can be verified in polynomial time”
• Note that NP stands for “Nondeterministic
Polynomial-time”

10
 Sample Problems in NP
• Fractional Knapsack
• MST
• Others?
– Traveling Salesman
– Graph Coloring
– Satisfiability (SAT)
• the problem of deciding whether a given
Boolean formula is satisfiable

11
 P And NP Summary

• P = set of problems that can be solved in

polynomial time
– Examples: Fractional Knapsack, …
• NP = set of problems for which a solution can be
verified in polynomial time
– Examples: Fractional Knapsack,…, TSP, CNF
SAT, 3-CNF SAT
• Clearly P ⊆ NP
• Open question: Does P = NP?
– P ≠ NP
 NP-hard
• What does NP-hard mean?
– A lot of times you can solve a problem by reducing it to
a different problem. I can reduce Problem B to
Problem A if, given a solution to Problem A, I can easily
construct a solution to Problem B. (In this case,
"easily" means "in polynomial time.“).
• A problem is NP-hard if all problems in NP
are polynomial time reducible to it, ...
• Ex:- Hamiltonian Cycle
Every problem in NP is reducible to HC in
polynomial time. Ex:- TSP is reducible to
HC.
B A
Example: lcm(m, n) = m * n / gcd(m, n), 13
 NP-complete problems
• A problem is NP-complete if the problem is
both
– NP-hard, and
– NP.
 Reduction

• A problem R can be reduced to another

problem Q if any instance of R can be
rephrased to an instance of Q, the
solution to which provides a solution to the
instance of R
– This rephrasing is called a transformation
• Intuitively: If R reduces in polynomial time
to Q, R is “no harder to solve” than Q
• Example: lcm(m, n) = m * n / gcd(m, n),
lcm(m,n) problem is reduced to gcd(m, n)
problem
 NP-Hard and NP-Complete

• If R is polynomial-time reducible to Q,
we denote this R ≤p Q
• Definition of NP-Hard and NP-
Complete:
– If all problems R ∈ NP are polynomial-time
reducible to Q, then Q is NP-Hard
– We say Q is NP-Complete if Q is NP-Hard
and Q ∈ NP
• If R ≤p Q and R is NP-Hard, Q is also
NP-Hard
17
 Summary
• P is set of problems that can be solved by a
deterministic Turing machine in Polynomial
time.
• NP is set of problems that can be solved by
a Non-deterministic Turing Machine in
Polynomial time. P is subset of NP (any
problem that can be solved by
deterministic machine in polynomial time
can also be solved by non-deterministic
machine in polynomial time) but P≠NP.

18
• Some problems can be translated into one
another in such a way that a fast solution to
one problem would automatically give us a fast
solution to the other.
• There are some problems that every single
problem in NP can be translated into, and a fast
solution to such a problem would automatically
give us a fast solution to every problem in NP.
This group of problems are known as NP-
Complete. Ex:- Clique
• A problem is NP-hard if an algorithm for solving
it can be translated into one for solving any NP-
problem (nondeterministic polynomial time)
problem. NP-hard therefore means "at least as
hard as any NP-problem," although it might, in
fact, be harder.

19
 First NP-complete problem—
Circuit Satisfiability (problem
definition)
• Boolean combinational circuit
– Boolean combinational elements, wired
together
– Each element, inputs and outputs (binary)
– Limit the number of outputs to 1.
– Called logic gates: NOT gate, AND gate, OR
gate.
– true table: giving the outputs for each
setting of inputs
– true assignment: a set of boolean inputs.
– satisfying assignment: a true assignment 20

causing the output to be 1.

 Circuit Satisfiability
Problem: definition
• Circuit satisfying problem: given a boolean
combinational circuit composed of AND,
OR, and NOT, is it stisfiable?
• CIRCUIT-SAT={<C>: C is a satisfiable
boolean circuit}
• Implication: in the area of computer-aided
hardware optimization, if a subcircuit
always produces 0, then the subcircuit can
be replaced by a simpler subcircuit that
omits all gates and just output a 0.
21
Two instances of circuit satisfiability problems

22
 Solving circuit-satisfiability
problem
• Intuitive solution:
– for each possible assignment, check
whether it generates 1.
– suppose the number of inputs is k, then
the total possible assignments are 2k.
So the running time is Ω(2k). When the
size of the problem is Θ(k), then the
running time is not polynomial.

23
 Example of reduction of CIRCUIT-SAT to SAT
φ= x10∧(x10↔(x7∧ x8∧ x9))
∧(x9↔(x6 ∨ x7))
∧(x8↔(x5 ∨ x6))
∧(x7↔(x1∧ x2∧ x4))
∧(x6↔ ¬x4))
∧(x5↔(x1 ∨ x2))
∧(x4↔¬x3)

:
REDUCTION φ= x10= x7∧ x8∧ x9=(x1∧ x2∧ x4) ∧ (x5 ∨ x6)∧ (x6 ∨ x7)
=(x1∧ x2∧ x4) ∧ ((x1 ∨ x2) ∨ ¬x4)∧ (¬x4 ∨ (x1∧ x2∧ x4))=….
24
 Conversion to 3 CNF
• The result is that in φ', each clause has at most
three literals.
• Change each clause into conjunctive normal form as
follows:
– Construct a true table, (small, at most 8 by 4)
– Write the disjunctive normal form for all true-table items
evaluating to 0
– Using DeMorgan law to change to CNF.
• The resulting φ'' is in CNF but each clause has 3 or
less literals.
• Change 1 or 2-literal clause into 3-literal clause as
follows:
– If a clause has one literal l, change it to (l∨p∨q)∧(l∨p∨¬q)∧
(l∨¬p∨q)∧ (l∨¬p∨¬q).
– If a clause has two literals (l1∨ l2), change it to (l1∨ l2 ∨p) ∧
(l1∨ l2 ∨¬p).

25
Example of a polynomial-time reduction:

We will reduce the

3CNF-satisfiability problem
to the

CLIQUE problem

26
3CNF formula: literal
( x1 ∨ x2 ∨ x3 ) ∧ ( x3 ∨ x5 ∨ x6 ) ∧ ( x3 ∨ x6 ∨ x4 ) ∧ ( x4 ∨ x5 ∨ x6 )

clause
Each clause has three literals

Language:

3CNF-SAT ={ w : w is a satisfiable
3CNF formula}

27
 A 5-clique in graph G

Language:
CLIQUE = { < G, k > : graph G
contains a k-clique}
28
Transform formula to graph.
Example:
( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ (x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ ( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 3 ) ∧ ( x 2 ∨ x 3 ∨ x 4 )
Clause 2
Create Nodes: x1 x2 x4 Clause 3

x1 x1

Clause 1 x2 x2

x4 Clause 4 x3

x2 x3 x4

29
( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ (x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ ( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 3 ) ∧ ( x 2 ∨ x 3 ∨ x 4 )

x1 x2 x4

x1 x1

x2 x2

x4 x3

x2 x3 x4

Add link from a literal ξ to a literal in every

other clause, except the complement ξ
30
( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ (x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ ( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 3 ) ∧ ( x 2 ∨ x 3 ∨ x 4 )

x1 x2 x4

x1 x1

x2 x2

x4 x3

x2 x3 x4

Resulting Graph
31
( x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ (x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 4 ) ∧ (x 1 ∨ x 2 ∨ x 3 ) ∧ (x 2 ∨ x 3 ∨ x 4 ) = 1
x1 = 1
x2 = 0 x1 x2 x4
x3 = 0
x1 x1
x4 = 1

x2 x2

x4 x3

x2 x3 x4

The formula is satisfied if and only if

the Graph has a 4-clique
The objective is to find a clique of size 4,
End of Proof
where 4 is the number of clauses. 32
Theorem:
If: a. Language A is NP-complete
b. Language B is in NP
c. A is polynomial time reducible to B
Then: B is NP-complete

33
Corollary: CLIQUE is NP-complete

Proof:
a. 3CNF-SAT is NP-complete
b. CLIQUE is in NP
c. 3CNF-SAT is polynomial reducible to CLIQUE
(shown earlier)

Apply previous theorem with

A=3CNF-SAT and B=CLIQUE
34
Previous Gate Questions

35
Q. No. 1

36
Q. No. 2

37
Q. No. 3

38
Q. No. 4

39
Q. No. 5

40
Q. No. 6

41
Q. No. 7

42
Q. No. 8

43
Q. No. 10

There exist: search problem

Explanation: The problem of finding

whether there exist a Hamiltonian
Cycle or not is NP Hard and NP
Complete Both.
Finding a Hamiltonian cycle in a
graph G = (V,E) with V divisible by 3
is also NP Hard.

44
Q. No. 11

45
Thank You

46