Computer Science – Logic in Computer Science
Scientific paper
2005-10-23
Computer Science
Logic in Computer Science
To appear in Logic Journal of the IGPL in 2006
Scientific paper
It is common practice to compare the computational power of different models of computation. For example, the recursive functions are strictly more powerful than the primitive recursive functions, because the latter are a proper subset of the former (which includes Ackermann's function). Side-by-side with this "containment" method of measuring power, it is standard to use an approach based on "simulation". For example, one says that the (untyped) lambda calculus is as powerful--computationally speaking--as the partial recursive functions, because the lambda calculus can simulate all partial recursive functions by encoding the natural numbers as Church numerals. The problem is that unbridled use of these two ways of comparing power allows one to show that some computational models are strictly stronger than themselves! We argue that a better definition is that model A is strictly stronger than B if A can simulate B via some encoding, whereas B cannot simulate A under any encoding. We then show that the recursive functions are strictly stronger in this sense than the primitive recursive. We also prove that the recursive functions, partial recursive functions, and Turing machines are "complete", in the sense that no injective encoding can make them equivalent to any "hypercomputational" model.
Boker Udi
Dershowitz Nachum
No associations
LandOfFree
Comparing Computational Power does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Comparing Computational Power, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Comparing Computational Power will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-324155