### Saturday, November 23, 2002

**FOCS and Visas**

The FOCS Conference, the major fall theory conference held last week in Vancouver,
sounded like a complete success. According to PC Chair Bernard Chazelle there were
320 registrants--quite a healthy number for this conference. Most encouraging was the larger number of students attending as well as a number of strong student papers indicating a solid future for theoretical computer science.
The 320 does not count another 50 "registrants" from Nigeria. They registered with fake credit card numbers in order to obtain letters from the conference organizers to help them obtain visas to go in this case to Canada. Whether they got the visas is unclear and they, of course, never showed up at the conference.

The temptation to help those from Africa is strong, especially since that continent is woefully underrepresented in computer science. However we must as a community be diligent against those who use our
conferences as a way to get around standard immigration laws. Whether or not we agree with those laws, if abuses of this nature continue it becomes harder to bring in legitimate scientists, a problem I discussed in my last post.

7:52 PM
#
Comments
[]

### Friday, November 22, 2002

**Coming to America**

A recent
Washington Post editorial brings up an important issue.
Andris Ambainis was supposed to spend the fall at MSRI in Berkeley but
instead is enjoying his native Latvia. When Manindra Agrawal came to
Boston last month to talk about his primality algorithm, he was
supposed to bring along his student co-authors. Instead he came
alone.

Worries about terrorism have caused the US government have made them
more cautious about issuing visas and this has slowed down the visa
process tremendously. Visa problems have always been a thorn for
academics but this fall seems particularly bad.

I understand the need to be careful but when science is hindered by
politics nobody is a winner.

9:58 AM
#
Comments
[]

### Wednesday, November 20, 2002

**Where was Cook's Talk?**

In 1971, Steve Cook gave his conference presentation that showed that SAT was
NP-complete. There it did not immediately stir up much excitement but it is, in
retrospect, the single most important conference talk in this history
of theoretical computer science. So when and where was this talk?
Steve Cook's paper The
Complexity of Theorem Proving Procedures appeared at the Third
Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC) that was held May
3-5, 1971 in Shaker Heights, Ohio, a suburb of Cleveland.

Funda Ergun, a professor at Case Western Reserve, just purchased a
house in Shaker Heights and wondered where exactly the conference took
place. We got the answer from Bill Rounds, who
was one of the local organizers of that conference.

*
It was (at I think Stouffer's hotel) at the intersection of
Warrensville Center Road and Chagrin Boulevard, in the Van Aken center
district. The hotel is now gone.
*

Here is a
Mapquest
map of that location.

Someday we will organize a P versus NP workshop in that area and make a
pilgrimage to this site.

8:00 AM
#
Comments
[]

### Tuesday, November 19, 2002

**Foundations of Complexity**

Lesson 8: Efficient Computation

Previous Lesson
| Next Lesson
In past lessons, we have studied the computable functions. Computable
functions can take an arbitrary amount of time: What good is a program
that will eventually give the correct answer but might not finish
before the universe collapses?

Somehow we want to limit the amount of time or memory that a computer
can use. Just giving a fixed bound does not work well. As technology
improves and computers get faster and better, we expect to solve
larger and larger problems in a reasonable amount of time. Hartmanis
and Stearns, in their seminal paper on computational complexity, turn
this around to come up with the right idea: Consider time and memory
as functions of the size of the input.

The *time* a machine M takes on input x is just the number of
computation steps that it takes before halting starting with input
x. I am being very informal about what a "step" is. In a later lesson
we will get into formal definitions of computers and steps but for now
just use the idea of implementing one instruction.

The memory or *space* as we theorists call it is just the number
of bits of storage used by M on a given input.

Edmonds gave an algorithm for the matching
problem that ran in polynomial time: The number of steps used by the
algorithm on a graph of size n is n^{k} for some k. He
suggests that polynomial-time captures efficient computation.

We now define our first complexity class P as the set of all languages L
for which machine exist that determine whether x is in L and halts in
time polynomial in the length of x. The P has many nice properties: A
polynomial-time algorithm that uses a polynomial-time subroutine
remains in polynomial-time. Also P is robust, that is the class is the
same no matter how you formally define your machines.

In these lessons, we will treat P as the class consisting of
efficiently computable problems. More classes will come.

9:48 AM
#
Comments
[]