Arjun Suresh (talk | contribs) |
Arjun Suresh (talk | contribs) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Which of the following '''CANNOT''' be true ? | Which of the following '''CANNOT''' be true ? | ||
| − | (A) | + | (A) $L_1$ $\in P$ and $L_2$ is finite |
| − | (B) | + | (B) $L_1$ $\in NP$ and $L_2$ $\in P$ |
| − | '''(C) | + | '''(C) $L_1$ is undecidable and $L_2$ is decidable''' |
| − | (D) | + | (D) $L_1$ is recursively enumerable and $L_2$ is recursive |
==={{Template:Author|Arjun Suresh|{{arjunweb}} }}=== | ==={{Template:Author|Arjun Suresh|{{arjunweb}} }}=== | ||
| − | Since, | + | Since, $f$ is a polynomial time computable bijection and <span class="nocode" style="color:#48484c"> $f^{-1}$ </span> is also polynomial time computable, $L_1$ and $L_2$ should have the same complexity (isomorphic). This is because, given a problem for $L_1$, we can always do a polynomial time reduction to $L_2$ and vice verse. Hence, the answer is 'C', as in 'A', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be finite, in 'B', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be in $P$ and in 'D', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be recursive. Only, in 'C' there is no intersection for $L_1$ and $L_2$, and hence it canʼt be true. |
Alternatively, we can prove 'C' to be false as follows: | Alternatively, we can prove 'C' to be false as follows: | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
[[Category: GATE2003]] | [[Category: GATE2003]] | ||
| − | [[Category: Automata | + | [[Category: Automata questions from GATE]] |
| − | |||
Consider two languages $L_1$ and $L_2$ each on the alphabet $\Sigma$. Let $f : \Sigma → \Sigma$ be a polynomial time computable bijection such that $(\forall x) [ x\in L_1$ iff $f(x) \in L_2]$. Further, let $f^{-1}$ be also polynomial time computable.
Which of the following CANNOT be true ?
(A) $L_1$ $\in P$ and $L_2$ is finite
(B) $L_1$ $\in NP$ and $L_2$ $\in P$
(C) $L_1$ is undecidable and $L_2$ is decidable
(D) $L_1$ is recursively enumerable and $L_2$ is recursive
GATECSESince, $f$ is a polynomial time computable bijection and $f^{-1}$ is also polynomial time computable, $L_1$ and $L_2$ should have the same complexity (isomorphic). This is because, given a problem for $L_1$, we can always do a polynomial time reduction to $L_2$ and vice verse. Hence, the answer is 'C', as in 'A', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be finite, in 'B', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be in $P$ and in 'D', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be recursive. Only, in 'C' there is no intersection for $L_1$ and $L_2$, and hence it canʼt be true.
Alternatively, we can prove 'C' to be false as follows:
Given $L_2$ is decidable. Now, for a problem in $L_1$, we can have a $TM$, which takes an input x, calculates $f(x)$ in polynomial time, check $f(x)$ is in $L_2$ (this is decidable as $L_2$ is decidable), and if it is, then output yes and otherwise no. Thus $L_1$ must also be decidable.
Consider two languages $L_1$ and $L_2$ each on the alphabet $\Sigma$. Let $f : \Sigma → \Sigma$ be a polynomial time computable bijection such that $(\forall x) [ x\in L_1$ iff $f(x) \in L_2]$. Further, let $f^{-1}$ be also polynomial time computable.
Which of the following CANNOT be true ?
(A) <math>L_1</math> $\in P$ and <math>L_2</math> is finite
(B) <math>L_1</math> $\in NP$ and <math>L_2</math> $\in P$
(C) <math>L_1</math> is undecidable and <math>L_2</math> is decidable
(D) <math>L_1</math> is recursively enumerable and <math>L_2</math> is recursive
Since, <math>f</math> is a polynomial time computable bijection and $f^{-1}$ is also polynomial time computable, $L_1$ and $L_2$ should have the same complexity (isomorphic). This is because, given a problem for $L_1$, we can always do a polynomial time reduction to $L_2$ and vice verse. Hence, the answer is 'C', as in 'A', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be finite, in 'B', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be in $P$ and in 'D', $L_1$ and $L_2$ can be recursive. Only, in 'C' there is no intersection for $L_1$ and $L_2$, and hence it canʼt be true.
Alternatively, we can prove 'C' to be false as follows:
Given $L_2$ is decidable. Now, for a problem in $L_1$, we can have a $TM$, which takes an input x, calculates $f(x)$ in polynomial time, check $f(x)$ is in $L_2$ (this is decidable as $L_2$ is decidable), and if it is, then output yes and otherwise no. Thus $L_1$ must also be decidable.