Table of Contents
Fetching ...

On the Complexity of Determinations

Joseph M. Hellerstein

Abstract

Classical complexity theory measures the cost of computing a function, but many computational tasks require committing to one valid output among several. We introduce determination depth -- the minimum number of sequential layers of irrevocable commitments needed to select a single valid output -- and show that no amount of computation can eliminate this cost. We exhibit relational tasks whose commitments are constant-time table lookups yet require exponential parallel width to compensate for any reduction in depth. A conservation law shows that enriching commitments merely relabels determination layers as circuit depth, preserving the total sequential cost. For circuit-encoded specifications, the resulting depth hierarchy captures the polynomial hierarchy ($Σ_{2k}^P$-complete for each fixed $k$, PSPACE-complete for unbounded $k$). In the online setting, determination depth is fully irreducible: unlimited computation between commitment layers cannot reduce their number.

On the Complexity of Determinations

Abstract

Classical complexity theory measures the cost of computing a function, but many computational tasks require committing to one valid output among several. We introduce determination depth -- the minimum number of sequential layers of irrevocable commitments needed to select a single valid output -- and show that no amount of computation can eliminate this cost. We exhibit relational tasks whose commitments are constant-time table lookups yet require exponential parallel width to compensate for any reduction in depth. A conservation law shows that enriching commitments merely relabels determination layers as circuit depth, preserving the total sequential cost. For circuit-encoded specifications, the resulting depth hierarchy captures the polynomial hierarchy (-complete for each fixed , PSPACE-complete for unbounded ). In the online setting, determination depth is fully irreducible: unlimited computation between commitment layers cannot reduce their number.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 54 sections, 18 theorems, 6 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1

Let $\mathcal{D}$ be a conditionally $\gamma$-spread distribution over $k$-position constraint chains with $\gamma < 1$. For the random $(k,m,s)$-distribution, $\gamma = s/m$, giving width $w \ge (m/s)^{k-d'}$.

Theorems & Definitions (63)

  • Definition 1: History
  • Definition 2: History Extension
  • Definition 3: Specification
  • Definition 4: Commitment
  • Definition 5: Determination
  • Example 1: Consensus server
  • Definition 6: Determination cost and determination depth
  • Definition 7: Atomic basis
  • Example 2: Three-valued consensus
  • Definition 8: Intrinsic determination depth
  • ...and 53 more