Dyn-FO: A Parallel, Dynamic Complexity Class

Traditionally, computational complexity has considered only static problems. Classical complexity classes such as NC, P, and NP are defined in terms of the complexity of checking?upon presentation of an entire input?whether the input satisfies a certain property. For many applications of computers it is more appropriate to model the process as a dynamic one. There is a fairly large object being worked on over a period of time. The object is repeatedly modified by users and computations are performed. We develop a theory of dynamic complexity. We study the new complexity class, dynamic first-order logic (Dyn-FO). This is the set of properties that can be maintained and queried in first-order logic, i.e., relational calculus, on a relational database. We show that many interesting properties are in Dyn-FO, including multiplication, graph connectivity, bipartiteness, and the computation of minimum spanning trees. Note that none of these problems is in static FO, and this fact has been used to justify increasing the power of query languages beyond first-order. It is thus striking that these problems are indeed dynamic first-order and, thus, were computable in first-order database languages all along. We also define “bounded-expansion reductions” which honor dynamic complexity classes. We prove that certain standard complete problems for static complexity classes, such as REACHafor P, remain complete via these new reductions. On the other hand, we prove that other such problems, including REACH for NL and REACHdfor L, are no longer complete via bounded-expansion reductions. Furthermore, we show that a version of REACHa, called REACHa+, is not in Dyn-FO unless all of P is contained in parallel linear time.

[1]  Monika Henzinger,et al.  Improved Data Structures for Fully Dynamic Biconnectivity , 2000, SIAM J. Comput..

[2]  Greg N. Frederickson,et al.  Data Structures for On-Line Updating of Minimum Spanning Trees, with Applications , 1985, SIAM J. Comput..

[3]  Jianwen Su,et al.  First-Order Incremental Evaluation of Datalog Queries , 1993, DBPL.

[4]  Kurt Mehlhorn,et al.  Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium of Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science , 1984 .

[5]  Michael Sipser,et al.  Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy , 1981, 22nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1981).

[6]  Peter Bro Miltersen The Bit Probe Complexity Measure Revisited , 1993, STACS.

[7]  V. S. Subrahmanian,et al.  Maintaining views incrementally , 1993, SIGMOD Conference.

[8]  R. Tarjan,et al.  Frederickson, \data Structures for On-line Updating of Minimum Spanning Trees", Siam , 2007 .

[9]  Peter Bro Miltersen,et al.  Complexity Models for Incremental Computation , 1994, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Neil Immerman,et al.  Languages that Capture Complexity Classes , 1987, SIAM J. Comput..

[11]  David Eppstein,et al.  Sparsification-a technique for speeding up dynamic graph algorithms , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[12]  Miklós Ajtai,et al.  ∑11-Formulae on finite structures , 1983, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[13]  Håkan Jakobsson,et al.  On Materializing Views and On-Line Queries , 1992, ICDT.

[14]  Liz Sonenberg,et al.  Integrity Constraint Checking in Stratified Databases , 1987, J. Log. Program..

[15]  David A. Mix Barrington,et al.  Bounded-width polynomial-size branching programs recognize exactly those languages in NC1 , 1986, STOC '86.

[16]  David Harel,et al.  Structure and complexity of relational queries , 1980, 21st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1980).

[17]  Greg N. Frederickson,et al.  Data structures for on-line updating of minimum spanning trees , 1983, STOC.

[18]  Ronald Fagin Generalized first-order spectra, and polynomial. time recognizable sets , 1974 .

[19]  Neil Immerman,et al.  Descriptive and Computational Complexity , 1989, FCT.

[20]  Neil Immerman,et al.  Number of Quantifiers is Better Than Number of Tape Cells , 1981, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[21]  Yanhong A. Liu,et al.  Systematic Derivation of Incremental Programs , 1995, Sci. Comput. Program..

[22]  Jianwen Su,et al.  Incremental and Decremental Evaluation of Transitive Closure by First-Order Queries , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[23]  E. Griffor,et al.  Computational Complexity Theory , 2022 .

[24]  R. Tamassia,et al.  Dynamic expression trees and their applications , 1991, SODA '91.

[25]  Thomas W. Reps,et al.  A categorized bibliography on incremental computation , 1993, POPL '93.

[26]  Neil Immerman,et al.  Expressibility and Parallel Complexity , 1989, SIAM J. Comput..

[27]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Storing a sparse table , 1979, CACM.

[28]  Greg N. Frederickson,et al.  Ambivalent data structures for dynamic 2-edge-connectivity and k smallest spanning trees , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[29]  J.A. Medina,et al.  A syntactic characterization of NP-completeness , 1994, Proceedings Ninth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[30]  Neil Immerman,et al.  The Complexity of Iterated Multiplication , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[31]  James C. Corbett,et al.  On the Relative Complexity of Some Languages in NC , 1989, Inf. Process. Lett..

[32]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  The cell probe complexity of dynamic data structures , 1989, STOC '89.

[33]  Thomas W. Reps,et al.  On the Computational Complexity of Dynamic Graph Problems , 1996, Theor. Comput. Sci..