2-EXPTIME can also be reformulated as the space class AEXPSPACE, the problems that can be solved by an alternating Turing machine in exponential space. This is one way to see that EXPSPACE ⊆ 2-EXPTIME, since an alternating Turing machine is at least as powerful as a deterministic Turing machine.[1]
2-EXPTIME is one class in a hierarchy of complexity classes with increasingly higher time bounds. The class 3-EXPTIME is defined similarly to 2-EXPTIME but with a triply exponential time bound . This can be generalized to higher and higher time bounds.
Examples
Examples of algorithms that require at least double-exponential time include:
Each decision procedure for Presburger arithmetic provably requires at least doubly exponential time[2]
Computing a Gröbner basis over a field. In the worst case, a Gröbner basis may have a number of elements which is doubly exponential in the number of variables. On the other hand, the worst-case complexity of Gröbner basis algorithms is doubly exponential in the number of variables as well as in the entry size.[3]
Finding a complete set of associative-commutative unifiers[4]
↑ Dubé, Thomas W. (1990年8月). 「多項式イデアルとグレブナー基底の構造」. SIAM Journal on Computing . 19 (4): 750–773 . doi : 10.1137/0219053 .
↑ Kapur, Deepak; Narendran, Paliath (1992), "完全なAC-unifierセットを計算する際の二重指数関数的複雑性", [ 1992 ] Proceedings of the Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science , pp. 11– 21, doi : 10.1109/LICS.1992.185515 , ISBN0-8186-2735-2S2CID 206437926。
↑Ben-Or, Michael; Kozen, Dexter; Reif, John (1986-04-01). "The complexity of elementary algebra and geometry". Journal of Computer and System Sciences. 32 (2): 251–264. doi:10.1016/0022-0000(86)90029-2. ISSN0022-0000.
↑Gruber, Hermann; Holzer, Markus (2008). "Finite Automata, Digraph Connectivity, and Regular Expression Size". Proceedings of the 35th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP 2008). Vol.5126. pp.39–50. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70583-3_4.
↑Johannsen, Jan; Lange, Martin (2003), "CTL+ is complete for double exponential time", in Baeten, Jos C. M.; Lenstra, Jan Karel; Parrow, Joachim; Woeginger, Gerhard J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP 2003)(PDF), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.2719, Springer-Verlag, pp.767–775, doi:10.1007/3-540-45061-0_60, ISBN978-3-540-40493-4, archived from the original(PDF) on 2007-09-30, retrieved 2006-12-22.
↑Schewe, Sven (2008). "ATL* Satisfiability is 2EXPTIME-Complete". In Aceto, Luca; Damgård, Ivan; Goldberg, Leslie Ann; Halldórsson, Magnús M.; Ingólfsdóttir, Anna; Walukiewicz, Igor (eds.). Automata, Languages and Programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol.5126. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp.373–385. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70583-3_31. ISBN978-3-540-70583-3.
↑Schmitz, Sylvain (2016). "Implicational Relevance Logic Is 2-Exptime-Complete". The Journal of Symbolic Logic. 81 (2): 641–661. arXiv:1402.0705. doi:10.1017/jsl.2015.7. ISSN0022-4812. JSTOR43864316.
↑ Lange, Martin; Lutz, Carsten (2005). "2-Exptime Lower Bounds for Propositional Dynamic Logics with Intersection" . The Journal of Symbolic Logic . 70 (4): 1072–1086 . doi : 10.2178/jsl/1129642115 . ISSN 0022-4812 . JSTOR 27588414 .
↑ Jussi Rintanen (2004). 「部分観測可能性を伴う計画の複雑性」(PDF) .自動計画およびスケジューリングに関する国際会議議事録. AAAI Press: 345–354 .
↑ Pnueli, A.; Rosner, R. (1989-01-03). 「リアクティブモジュールの合成について」 .第16回 ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT プログラミング言語の原理に関するシンポジウム - POPL '89 議事録. ニューヨーク州ニューヨーク: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 179–190 . doi : 10.1145/75277.75293 . ISBN978-0-89791-294-5。