Abstract
Using the predicate language for ordered fields a class of problems referred to aslinear problems is defined. This class contains, for example, all systems of linear equations and inequalities, all linear programming problems, all integer programming problems with bounded variables, all linear complementarity problems, the testing of whether sets that are defined by linear inequalities are semilattices, all satisfiability problems in sentenial logic, the rank-computation of matrices, the computation of row-reduced echelon forms of matrices, and all quadratic programming problems with bounded variables. A single, one, algorithm, to which we refer as theUniversal Linear Machine, is described. It solves any instance of any linear problem. The Universal Linear Machine runs in two phases. Given a linear problem, in the first phase a Compiler running on a Turing Machine generates alinear algorithm for the problem. Then, given an instance of the linear problem, in the second phase the linear algorithm solves the particular instance of the linear problem. The linear algorithm is finite, deterministic, loopless and executes only the five ordered field operations — additions, multiplications, subtractions, divisions and comparisons. Conversely, we show that for each linear algorithm there is a linear problem which the linear algorithm solves uniquely. Finally, it is shown that with a linear algorithm for a linear problem, one can solve certain parametric instances of the linear problem.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
E. Balas, “Disjunctive programming: properties of the convex hulls of feasible points,” unpublished manuscript, (1974).
L. Blum, M. Shub and S. Smale, “On the theory of computation and complexity over the real numbers: NP-completeness recursive functions and universal machines,”Bulletin (New Series) of the American Mathematical Society 21 (1989) 1–46.
G. Collins, “Quantifier elimination for real closed fields by cylindrical algebraic decomposition,” in:Lecture Notes in Computer Science 33 (Springer Verlag, New York, 1975) pp. 515–532.
B.C. Eaves, “A finite procedure for determining if a quadratic form is bounded below on a closed polyhedral convex set,”Mathematical Programming 14 (1978) 122–124.
B.C. Eaves and U.G. Rothblum, “Invariant polynomial curves of piecewise linear maps,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 26 (1988) 401–416.
B.C. Eaves and U.G. Rothblum, “A theory on extending algorithms for parametric problems,”Mathematics of Operations Research 14 (1989) 502–533.
B.C. Eaves and U.G. Rothblum, “Dines—Fourier—Motzkin quantifier-elimination and applications of corresponding transfer principles over ordered fields,”Mathematical Programming 53 (1992a) 307–321.
B.C. Eaves and U.G. Rothblum, “Formulation of linear problems and solution by a universal machine,” Technical Report, Stanford University, Department of Operations Research (1992b).
B.C. Eaves and U.G. Rothblum, “Linear problems and randomized linear algorithms,” Technical report, Stanford University, Department of Operations Research (1994).
H.B. Enderton,A Mathematical Introduction to Logic (Academic Press, New York, 1970).
M. Fischer and M. Rabin, “Super-exponential complexity for Presburger arithmetic,”Complexity of Computations, SIAM-AMS Proceedings 7 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1974) pp. 27–41.
D. Flath and S. Wagon, “How to pick out the integers in the rationals: an application of number theory to logic,”American Mathematical Monthly 98 (1991) 812–823.
M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson,Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness (W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, CA, 1979).
D. Yu. Grigor'ev, “The complexity of deciding Tarski algebra,”Journal of Symbolic Computation 5 (1988) 65–108.
J.P. Jones and Y.V. Matijasevič, “Proof of recursive unsolvability of Hilbert's tenth problem,”American Mathematical Monthly 98 (1991) 689–709.
S. MacLane and G. Birkhoff,Algebra (Chelsea Publishing Company, New York, N.Y., 1967).
J. Renegar, “On the computational complexity and geometry of the first-order theory of the reals,” Parts I, II and III,Journal of Symbolic Computation 3 (1992) 255–352.
A. Seidenberg, “A new decision method for elementary algebra,”Annals of Mathematics 60 (1954) 365–374.
A. Tarski,A Decision Method for Elementary Algebra and Geometry, Second edition, revised (University of California Press, Berkely, CA, 1951).
L. van den Dries, “Quantifier elimination for linear formulas over ordered and valued fields,”Bulletin de la Société Mathématique de Belgique 33, serie B (1981) 19–33.
V. Weispfenning, “The complexity of linear problems in fields,”Journal of Symbolic Computation 5 (1988) 32–27.
H. Weyl, “Elementary proof of a minimax theorem due to von Neumann”, in:Contributions to the Theory of Games, Annals of Mathematical Studies1, no. 24, Eds. H.W. Kuhn and A.W. Tucker (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1950) pp. 19–25.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation Grant DMS 92-07409, by the Department of Energy Grant DE-FG03-87-ER-25028, by the United States—Israel Binational Science Foundation Grant 90-00434 and by ONR Grant N00014-92-J1142.
Corresponding author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Eaves, B.C., Rothblum, U.G. Formulation of linear problems and solution by a universal machine. Mathematical Programming 65, 263–309 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581699
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581699