EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
William T. Laaser
dblp:77/361
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational complexity › complexity classes
complete sets |
0.0 | 1 | 1974 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974 |
Algorithms and data structures
polynomial-time algorithms |
0.0 | 1 | 1974 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974 |
Algorithms and data structures › polynomial-time algorithms
PTIME |
0.0 | 1 | 1974 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974 |
Automata and formal languages
turing machines |
0.0 | 1 | 1974 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time · STOC 1974 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
satisfiability · 0.0reduction · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | Finding Extrema with Unary Predicates
Feng Gao 0002, Leonidas J. Guibas, David G. Kirkpatrick, William T. Laaser, James B. Saxe |
Algorithmica | 4 |
| 1976 | New Problems Complete for Nondeterministic Loc Space
Neil D. Jones, Y. Edmund Lien, William T. Laaser |
Math. Syst. Theory | 3 |
| 1976 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial Time
Neil D. Jones, William T. Laaser |
Theor. Comput. Sci. | 2 |
| 1974 | Complete Problems for Deterministic Polynomial TimeabstractThe 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 |
STOC | 2 |