Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with permanent
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 42948
10
votes
Accepted
Is deciding whether changing one entry decreases the permanent of a matrix in the polynomial...
Your problem is equivalent to testing, given $M$, whether $PER(M) > 0$.
Proof: Assume you are given $M$ and you want to decide whether $PER(M) > 0$. We construct $M'$ as follows:
\begin{bmatrix}
…
- 2,344
9
votes
Accepted
Complexity of computing generalised determinants. (P - #P transition)
Nicolas de Rugy-Altherre studied the complexity of one of them, the Fermionant, and proves other $VNP$-completeness results for such functions in "Determinant versus Permanent: salvation via generalization …
- 2,344
6
votes
Easy problems with hard counting versions
Concerning your second question, problems such as Monotone-2-SAT (deciding of the satisfiability of a CNF-formula having at most 2 positive literals by clause) is completely trivial (you just have to …
- 2,344