In computer science, FIXP is a complexity class introduced by Kousha Etessami and Mihalis Yannakakis at 2010.[1] It represents problems that can be solved by computing a fixed point of a function that satisfies the conditions of Brouwer's fixed point theorem. More formally, FIXP contains search problems that can be cast as fixed point computation problems for functions represented by algebraic circuits over basis {+,*,-,/,max,min} with rational constants.

They prove that some fundamental problems in economics and game theory are complete for FIXP, in particular:

Proving membership in FIXP

edit

Filos-Ratsikas, Hansen, Høgh and Hollender[2] present a general method for proving membership in FIXP. Their method constructs a black-box that they call “OPT-gate”, which can solve most convex optimization problems. Using their technique, they prove FIXP membership of:

They also prove FIXP membership for Nash equilibrium computation and for the mechanism of Hylland and Zeckhauser[3] for fair random assignment.

Relations to other classes

edit

Relation to PPAD

edit

Etessami and Yannakakis describe the relation succinctly by saying that "The piecewise-linear fragment of FIXP equals PPAD". In other words,[4] the problems in PPAD are the problems in FIXP in which the input function is piecewise-linear.

Solutions to problems in PPAD are rational numbers, whereas solutions to problems in FIXP are algebraic numbers.[5]

PPAD is contained in function classes that are in the intersection of NP and co-NP, whereas FIXP is conjectured to be much harder, and lie in the "harder" end of PSPACE.[5]

Relation to SRS

edit

Computing an approximate Nash equilibrium to any factor smaller than 1/2 is at least as hard as the square-root sum problem.

References

edit
  1. ^ Etessami, Kousha; Yannakakis, Mihalis (January 2010). "On the Complexity of Nash Equilibria and Other Fixed Points". SIAM Journal on Computing. 39 (6): 2531–2597. doi:10.1137/080720826. hdl:20.500.11820/98752471-0a7a-4366-8871-b8f1984190ef. ISSN 0097-5397.
  2. ^ Filos-Ratsikas, Aris; Hansen, Kristoffer A.; Høgh, Kasper; Hollender, Alexandros (2023-04-04). "FIXP-Membership via Convex Optimization: Games, Cakes, and Markets". SIAM Journal on Computing: FOCS21–30. arXiv:2111.06878. doi:10.1137/22M1472656. ISSN 0097-5397.
  3. ^ Hylland, Aanund; Zeckhauser, Richard (1979). "The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions". Journal of Political Economy. 87 (2): 293. doi:10.1086/260757. S2CID 154167284.
  4. ^ Fearnley, John; Goldberg, Paul; Hollender, Alexandros; Savani, Rahul (2022-12-19). "The Complexity of Gradient Descent: CLS = PPAD ∩ PLS". Journal of the ACM. 70 (1): 7:1–7:74. arXiv:2011.01929. doi:10.1145/3568163. ISSN 0004-5411. S2CID 263706261.
  5. ^ a b Garg, Jugal; Mehta, Ruta; Vazirani, Vijay V.; Yazdanbod, Sadra (2017-06-19). "Settling the complexity of Leontief and PLC exchange markets under exact and approximate equilibria". Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing. STOC 2017. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 890–901. doi:10.1145/3055399.3055474. ISBN 978-1-4503-4528-6.

📚 Artikel Terkait di Wikipedia

PPAD (complexity)

that a complexity class called CLS is equal to the intersection of PPAD and PLS. Etessami and Yannakakis (who invented the related class FIXP) write that

Kousha Etessami

computational complexity theory, game theory and probabilistic systems. Etessami is one of the inventors of the complexity class FIXP. "Kousha Etessami"

Mihalis Yannakakis

verification of MSC-graphs. Yannakakis is one of the inventors of the complexity class FIXP. Yannakakis is a member of both the National Academy of Engineering

Market equilibrium computation

(who defined the complexity class FIXP) proved that computing CE prices for exchange markets with algebraic demand functions is FIXP-complete. Later results

Nash equilibrium computation

Yannakkis (who defined the complexity class FIXP) proved that computing an exact or approximate NE for 3 or more players is FIXP-complete. They also show

High-level synthesis

the tool. This is the same trade off of execution speed for hardware complexity as seen when a given program is run on conventional processors of differing

Consensus splitting

search problem. This means that it is complete for the complexity class BU – a superclass of FIXP that involves solutions to problems whose existence is