ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A Machine-Independent Theory of the Complexity of Recursive Functions
Full text PdfPdf (977 KB)
Source Journal of the ACM (JACM) archive
Volume 14 ,  Issue 2  (April 1967) table of contents
Pages: 322 - 336  
Year of Publication: 1967
ISSN:0004-5411
Author
Manuel Blum  Department of Mathematics and Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 25,   Downloads (12 Months): 168,   Citation Count: 93
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/321386.321395
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The number of steps required to compute a function depends, in general, on the type of computer that is used, on the choice of computer program, and on the input-output code. Nevertheless, the results obtained in this paper are so general as to be nearly independent of these considerations. A function is exhibited that requires an enormous number of steps to be computed, yet has a “nearly quickest” program: Any other program for this function, no matter how ingeniously designed it may be, takes practically as many steps as this nearly quickest program. A different function is exhibited with the property that no matter how fast a program may be for computing this function another program exists for computing the function very much faster.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
ARBIB, M. A., AND BLUM, M. Machine dependence of degrees of difficulty. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 16, 3 (June 1965), 442-447.
 
2
HARTMANIS, J., AND STEARNS, R. E. On the computational complexity of algorithms. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 117, 5 (May 1965), 285-306.
 
3
----- ,AND ........ . Computational complexity of reeursive sequences. Proc. 5th Annual Symp. on Switching Theory and Logical Design, Princeton, N. J., 1964.
 
4
MYHILL, J. Linear bounded automata. WADD Tech. Note 60-165, U. of Pennsylvania Rep. No. 60-22 (June 1960).
 
5
RABIN, M. O. Degree of difficulty of computing a function and a partial ordering of recursive sets. Tech. Rep. No. 2, Hebrew U., Jerusalem, Israel (April 1960).
 
6
---. Real time computation. Israel J. Math. I (1963), 203-211.
 
7
RITCHIE, R.W. Classes of predictably computable functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. I06, 1 (June 1963), 139-173.
 
8
BOOERS, It., JR. GSdel numberings of partiM reeursive functions. J. Symbolic Logic 23, 3 (Sept. 1958), 331-341.
 
9
----. Recursive functions and effective computability. McGraw-Hill, New York (in press).
 
10
YAMADA, H. Real-time computation and recursive functions not real-time computable. IR, E Trans. EC-11, 66 (Dec. 1962), 753-760.
 
11
COBHAM, A. The intrinsic computational complexity of functions. Proc. 1964 Int. Congress on Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, 24-30.
 
12
COOKE, S. A. Otl the minimum computation time of functions. Bell Labs. Rep. BL-41, 1966.
 
13
WINOGRAD, S. On the time required to perform multiplication. IBM Res. Rep. RC-1564, 1966.

CITED BY  93
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: