Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

William T. Laaser

dblp:77/361 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1993
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 4

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Algorithms and data structures · 61% Computational complexity · 30% Automata and formal languages · 9%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational complexity › complexity classes
complete sets
0.011974
Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974
Algorithms and data structures
polynomial-time algorithms
0.011974
Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974
Algorithms and data structures › polynomial-time algorithms
PTIME
0.011974
Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974
Automata and formal languages
turing machines
0.011974
Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

satisfiability · 0.0reduction · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1993 Finding Extrema with Unary Predicates
Feng Gao 0002, Leonidas J. Guibas, David G. Kirkpatrick, William T. Laaser, James B. Saxe
Algorithmica4
1976 New Problems Complete for Nondeterministic Loc Space
Neil D. Jones, Y. Edmund Lien, William T. Laaser
Math. Syst. Theory3
1976 Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time
Neil D. Jones, William T. Laaser
Theor. Comput. Sci.2
1974 Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time
abstract
The results of Cook and Karp ([K], [C]) aroused considerable interest for at least two reasons. First, the answer to a long-standing open question which had seemed peculiar to automata theory—whether deterministic and nondeterministic polynomial-time-bounded Turing machines are equivalent in power—was seen to be exactly equivalent to determining whether any of several familiar combinatorial problems can be solved by polynomial-time algorithms. Second, the existence of complete problems for NP1 made it possible to replace an entire class of questions by a question about a single representative.Thus all of these combinatorial and automata-theoretic problems were essentially restatements of a single problem, such as: can satisfiability of a propositional formula be decided in polynomial time.
Neil D. Jones, William T. Laaser
STOC2