0 Up votes0 Down votes

4 views13 pagesTheory of Computation

Nov 02, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Theory of Computation

© All Rights Reserved

4 views

Theory of Computation

© All Rights Reserved

- The Woman Who Smashed Codes: A True Story of Love, Spies, and the Unlikely Heroine who Outwitted America's Enemies
- Steve Jobs
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook, Red Letter Edition
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- Cryptonomicon
- Console Wars: Sega, Nintendo, and the Battle that Defined a Generation
- Make Your Mind Up: My Guide to Finding Your Own Style, Life, and Motavation!
- The Golden Notebook: A Novel
- Alibaba: The House That Jack Ma Built
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Autonomous: A Novel
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are
- Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy

You are on page 1of 13

COMPLEXITY THEORY

Motivation:

Computability : Generally problems are categorize into two, solvable and unsolvable.

Unsolvable means no matter how clever you are, no matter how powerful your digital

computer is, it is impossible to get the solution. you can understand the problem clearly, but

difficult to solve it. Some example of unsolvable problem are Halting problem, post

correspondence problem etc. Mathematicians initially raised this question for ages, what can

be computed and what cannot be computed. For example it is possible to bisect an angle

using ruler and compass, but it is impossible to trisect an angle. It is not possible to write

in decimal form, we can write upto 10000 place or 1 lakh place. No one is able to write in

exact decimal form or no one will ever be able to write in decimal form . They have come up

with a beautiful categorization of computability. Using recursive function they explained

what can be computed and what can not. They said recursive function is the ultimate for

computation. Then logicians, they defined first order logic ,second order logic etc and argued

that this is the ultimate for computation. Then linguistics have come with some symbols and

they said if any thing is computable it can be computed using some string manipulation. They

said type 0 grammar is the ultimate for computation. Turing, Even before the computer is

found, he designed a machine for computation. He said corresponding to any computable

function, there is a instruction set in the machine which is able to compute it. All these

computational models happened independently and everyone argued that their model is the

ultimate for computation.

Even though all the theory was developed independently ,Church claimed that all are

equivalent and his is just like many religion identified god in different way and finally agreed

that all are true

In mid fifties it is agreed that Turing computability is the ultimate .if recursive function

capture some functions which is computable, correspondingly we can design a Turing

machine. Therefore a problem is solvable then it is possible to design a Turing machine. If it is

impossible to design a Turing machine for a particular problem that problem is unsolvable

Complexity Theory

Now things changed from what can be computed to how well it can be computed

It is possible to find an efficient solution for certain problems and in certain other problem it is

not. For a travelling salesman problem it is not possible to get an n 2 algorithm .In automata

theory Idea of non determinism is introduced. here we solve the problem by doing multiple

option concurrently

Deterministic and non deterministic algorithms

The algorithm with the property that the result of every operation is uniquely determined is

known as deterministic algorithm.

Ex Algorithm to find root of a quadratic equation, algorithm to sort n numbers using bubble

sort etc

Algorithms whose outcomes are not uniquely defined but are limited to specified set of

possibilities is known as nondeterministic algorithm

Ex consider the following pseudo code

X = 10;

If(x==5)

{

Call function 1

Or

Call function 2

{

Else {

Call function 3

Or

Call function 4

}. This pseudo code is nondeterministic in nature.

Tractable and intractable problems

The problems that can be solved in finite amount of time is called tractable problems

Ex problem to find sum of 100 numbers

Problems solved using exponential algorithms(having the worst case complexity such as

O(2n),O(nn)) are called intractable problems

EX Travelling salesman problem

Decision problems

Any problem for which the answer is either zero or one is called a decision problem. An

algorithm for a decision problem is termed as a decision algorithm.

P class problem

It is the set of all decision problems that can be solved using deterministic algorithms in

polynomial time.

Feature of P class problem

1) P class problems are decision type problems.

2) P class problems are tractable

3) They are solved using deterministic algorithms

Non deterministic Polynomial(NP) problems

NP problems can be defined as the class of decision problems that can be solved in

polynomial time by non deterministic algorithms. Guess and verify mechanism is used to

prove that a problem is in NP. That is if a certificate is given it can be verified in polynomial

2

time. For example in the Hamiltonian cycle problem, the certificate is the list of vertices in the

Hamiltonian cycle. If a graph is Hamiltonian, the Hamiltonian cycle itself offers enough

information to verify this fact. NP is the set of problems where we can verify a Yes answer

quickly if we have the solution in front of us. For example, the circuit satisfiability problem is

in NP. If the answer is yes, then any set of m input values that produces True output is a proof

of this fact; we can check the proof by evaluating the circuit in polynomial time.

Note : Hamiltonian cycle is a simple cycle that visits every vertex exactly once

Prove that searching problem belongs to NP

Consider the searching problem. problem is to search a particular element in a binary tree. Let

the depth of the binary tree be n. Then the number of elements in the tree having depth n is

2n-1. If we use deterministic algorithm the search would take O(2 n) comparison, which is

exponential one.

But here we apply non deterministic machine to solve this problem as follows.

A non deterministic machine can compare the search element with all elements at each level

in single operation (one unit of time) .That is at each level it can have multiple options and it

will be performed in single unit of time. Therefore the search algorithm will have time

complexity O(n) which is polynomial in nature. Hence above problem is NP.

Note:

Since deterministic algorithms are just a special case of non deterministic one we conclude

that P NP. But it is not known whether P = NP or P NP which is a famous unsolved problem

in computer science.

Polynomial reductions

Defn: Let L1 and L2 be two problems. Problem L1 reduces to L2 iff there is a way to solve L1

by a deterministic polynomial algorithm that solves L2 in polynomial time. This means that if

we have a polynomial algorithm for L2 then we can solve L1 in polynomial time. Or in other

words we write L1 p L2 which means L1 is not more than a polynomial factor harder than L2.

Interpretations of L1 p L2:

3

2) L2 is at least as hard as L1: if L1 is known to be hard, then the reduction L1 p L2

yields that L2 is also hard .

Assume that L1 is reducible to L2

Then if:

We know:

L1 is

unsolvable

L2 is unsolvable

L1 is solvable

Nothing about

L2

L2 is solvable

L1 is solvable

L2 is

unsolvable

Nothing about

L1

Consider a decision problem A which would like to solve in polynomial time. We call the input

to a particular problem an instance of that problem. Suppose that there is another decision

problem say B that we already know how to solve in polynomial time. We transform an

instance of A into some instance of B with the following characteristics

1) The transformation takes polynomial time

2) The answer for is yes iff the answer for is also yes .

Here we use the easiness of B to prove the easiness of A.That is if the problem B can

be solved in polynomial time then A is also can be solved in polynomial time.

problem to be NP complete by reducing some known NP complete to it

using a polynomial time reduction.

How could we use polynomial time reductions to show that no polynomial algorithm

exist for a problem ?

We need to show that there is no polynomial algorithm exist for the problem B.

We assume that there exists a polynomial algorithm for the problem B.

Suppose we have a decision problem A for which we already know that no polynomial

algorithm exist. We transform instance of A to instance of B using polynomial time reduction.

Since B is solvable ,A will also be solvable using polynomial reduction algorithm., which is a

contradiction to our assumption. hence no polynomial time algorithm exists for B.

NP hard problems

A problem L is NP hard if there is a L1

4

algorithm for every problem in NP. This is like saying that if we could solve one particular NPhard problem quickly, then we could quickly solve any problem whose solution is easy to

understand, using the solution to that one special problem as a subroutine.

Example: satisfiabilty problem, traveling salesman problem

NP Complete

The concept of NP completeness was introduced by S.A Cook to solve the problem P = NP.

A problem L is said to be NP complete if

1) L

NP

2) For every L 1

1) No polynomial time algorithm has been found for any one of them

2) It is not established that polynomial algorithm for these problems do not exist

3) If a polynomial algorithm is found for one of them,there will be polynomial algorithm for

all of them.

4) If it can be proved that no polynomial time algorithm exists for any one of them then it

will not exist for any one of them

NP Complete Problems

The following lemma is the basis of the for showing that a problem is NP complete

Lemma: If L is a problem such that L p L for some L NPC then L is NP hard. Moreover If L

NP then L NPC.

Pf : Since L is NP complete, for all L NP , we have L p L. By supposition . L p L and thus

by transitivity we have L p L , which sows that L is NP hard . If L NP , we also have L

NPC.

Theorem 1

Circuit satisfiabilty problem is NP complete.

Circuit satisfiability is a good example of a problem that we don't know how to solve in

polynomial time. In this problem, the input is a boolean circuit: a collection of and, or, and not

gates connected by wires. The input to the circuit is a set of m boolean (true/false) values x1,

xm. The output is a single boolean value. The circuit satisfiability problem asks, given a

circuit, whether there is an input that makes the circuit output True, or conversely, whether

the circuit always outputs False. Nobody knows how to solve this problem faster than just

5

trying all 2m possible inputs to the circuit, but this requires exponential time. On the other

hand, nobody has ever proved that this is the best we can do; maybe there's a clever

algorithm that nobody has discovered yet! But using non deterministic algorithm we can solve

this problem in polynomial time.(Proof not necessary)

Satisfiabilty problem(SAT)

SATISFIABILITY, or SAT is a problem of great practical importance, with applications ranging

from chip testing and computer design to image analysis and software engineering. It is also a

canonical hard problem. Here's what an instance of SAT looks like:

(x y z) (x y) (y z) (z x) (x y z):

This is a Boolean formula in conjunctive normal form (CNF). It is a collection of clauses (the

parentheses), each consisting of the disjunction of several literals, where a literal is either a

Boolean variable (such as x) or the negation of one (such as x).A satisfying truth assignment

is an assignment of false or true to each variable so that every clause contains a literal whose

value is true.

Let x1,x2, xn be n variables which assumes 2 values 0 or 1. Let f(x1,x2,xn) be a function in

Boolean variable and these variables are connected by connectives AND,OR,NOT,

IMPLICATION and IFF . The problem is to find an assignment for the variable x1,x2,xn such

that f(x1,x2..xn) = 1.The satisfiability problem asks whether a given Boolean formula is

satisfiable.

As an example the formula =(( x1x2) ((x1x3)x4))x2 has the satisfying

assignment x1 = 0, x2 =0, x3=0, x4 =1), since = (( 00) ((01) 1))0 =

(1 (1 1))1 = (10)1 = 1 and hence the formula belongs to SAT.

Qn Prove that satisfiabilty problem is NP complete

Proof : In order to prove SAT in NP complete we need to show 1) SAT

To prove SAT

NP 2) SAT is NP HARD

NP

X1,x2..xn are n variable which takes values either 0 or 1.We need to find the assignment of

the variable x1,x2xn with values 0 or 1 so that f(x1,x2,..xn) = 1.In order to find truth

assignment for the variable we have to see the all the possibilities. Since there are 2 n different

possibilities, the time complexity is O(2n) if we apply deterministic algorithm.

So we apply non deterministic algorithm to solve this problem. We arrange each assignment

in a tree as follows.

Suppose n=3, then different assignments are (0,0,0), (0,0,1), (1,0,0), (1,1,0), (1,0,1), (0,1,0),

(1,0,1), (0,1,1).

instead of taking each assignment as a single unit. Here we have only 3 levels to do operation

and hence the time complexity is only O(n) which is a polynomial time. Hence SAT

NP

To prove SAT

Here we prove that CIRCUIT SAT P SAT. In other words any instance of circuit satisfiabilty can

be reduced in polynomial time to an instance of formula satisfiability. For example, we could

transform the given circuit into a formula as follows:

Y8 = y4 y7 y6

=(y1 x2) (y5 y3) x5

=((x1 x4 ) x2) (x2 (y2x3)) x5

= ( x1 x2) (x4 x2) (x2 y2) (x2 x3) x5 which is in CNF.

Now the original circuit is satisfiable if and only if the resulting formula is satisfiable. For each

wire xi in the circuit ,the formula has a variable xi. The proper operation of a gate can now

be expressed a formula involving the variable of its incident wires. If the circuit C has a

satisfying assignment ,each wire of the circuit has a well defined value and output of the

circuit is 1.Therefore the assignment of wire values to variables in makes each clause of

evaluate to 1 and thus conjunction of all evaluates to 1. Conversely if there is an assignment

that causes to evaluate 1,the circuit is satisfiable by an analogous argument. Thus we have

CIRCUIT SAT P SAT.

We have already proved by theorem 1 that CIRCUIT SAT IS NP COMPLETE. Since CIRCUIT SAT

is NP Complete,SAT NP and CIRCUIT SAT P SAT, SAT is also NP Complete

Prove that 3 CNF satisfiabilty( 3 SAT) is NP complete

A literal in a Boolean formula is an occurrence of a variable or its negation. A Boolean formula

is in conjunctive form or CNF if it is expressed as an AND of clauses,each of which is the OR of

one or more literals. A Boolean formula is in 3-conjunctive form or 3 CNF if each clause has

exactly 3 distinct literals. For example the Boolean formula ( x1 x1 x2) ( x3 x2

x4) (x1 x3 x4 ) is in 3 CNF. In 3 CNF-SAT, we are asked whether a given Boolean

formula is satisfiable

To prove 3 CNF NP

The same proof for the SAT NP can be given . Here

literals.

To prove 3-CNF NP hard ,we show that SAT P 3-CNF-SAT . The reduction algorithm can be

broken into 3 basic steps

Step 1: first we construct a binary parse tree for the input formula with literals as leaves

and connectives as internal nodes. The parse tree for the formula =(( x1x2)

((x1x3)x4))x2 is

We introduce a variable yi for the output of each internal node. Then we rewrite the

original formula as the AND of the root variable and a conjunction of clause describing the

operation of each node. The resulting expression corresponding to the formula is

= y1 (y1(y2 x2)

(y6 (x1 x3)) . Observe that the formula thus obtained is a

conjunction of clauses i, each of which has at most 3 literals. The only additional

requirement is that each clause be an OR of literals

8

Step 2 : we convert each clause I into conjunctive normal form. We construct a truth table

for i by evaluating all possible assignments to its variable. Each row of the truth table

consists of a possible assignment of the variables of the clause ,together with the value of

the clause under that assignment. Using the truth variable entries that evaluate to 0, we build

a formula in disjunctive form, which is equivalent to

CNF using DeMorgans law. For example we take 1 = (y1(y2 x2) and the truth table

corresponding to this is

y1

y2

x2

(y1(y2 x2)

0

0

0

1

Therefore the DNF is

1 = ( y1 y2 x2) ( y1 y2 x2) (y1 y2 x2)

( y1 y2 x2) we get CNF by applying DeMorgans law . i.e

1 = ( y1 y2

x2) ( y1 y2 x2) (y1 y2 x2) (y1 y2 x2) . Similarly each clause i of

the formula can be converted to i, which is a CNF with almost 3 literals

Step 3 : Each clause has exactly 3 distinct literals

For each clause Ci of , we include following clauses in .

1) If Ci has 3 distinct literals we simply include Ci as a clause of .

2) If Ci has 2 distinct literals, that is if Ci = (l1 l2) then we include (l1 l2 p) (l1 l2

p) as clause of .

3) If Ci has just 1 distinct literal l then we include (l p q) (l p q) (l p

q) (l p q) as clause of ,

We can see that 3-CNF formula is satisfiable iff is satisfiable. The construction of

from in the first step preserves satisfiability. The second step produces a CNF formula

that is equivalent to . The third step produces a 3 CNF formula that is equivalent to .

Hence SAT P 3-CNF-SAT.We have already proved that SAT IS NP COMPLETE. Since 3- CNF

NP and SAT P 3- CNF SAT, 3 -CNF is also NP Complete.

A clique is another name for a complete graph(every pair of verices is connected by an

edge). The maximum clique size problem, or simply MaxClique, is to compute, given a graph,

the number of nodes in its largest complete subgraph.

9

..(1)

For a given graph G = (V,E) we use the set V V of vertices in the clique as a certificate for

G.Checking whether V is a clique can be accomplished in polynomial time by checking

whether for each pair u,v V the edge(u,v) belongs to E.

Secondly we prove that it is NP Hard using a reduction from 3CNF -SAT(2)

For that we ues a reduction algorithm that transforms a 3CNF formula into a graph that has a

clique of a certain size if and only if the formula is satisfiable.

The graph has one node for each instance of each literal in the formula. Two nodes are

connected

by an edge if (1) they correspond to literals in different clauses and (2) those literals do not

contradict each other. In particular, all the nodes that come from the same literal (in different

clauses) are joined by edges. For example, the formula

is transformed into the following graph. (Look for the edges that aren't in the graph.)

Now suppose the original formula had k clauses. Then we claim that the formula is satisfiable

if and only if the graph has a clique of size k.

1. k-clique =) satisfying assignment: If the graph has a clique of k vertices, then each vertex

must come from a different clause. To get the satisfying assignment, we declare that each

literal in the clique is true. Since we only connect non-contradictory literals with edges,this

10

declaration assigns a consistent value to several of the variables. There may be variables that

have no literal in the clique; we can set these to any value we like.

2. satisfying assignment =) k-clique: If we have a satisfying assignment, then we can choose

one literal in each clause that is true. Those literals form a clique in the graph.Thus, the

reduction is correct. Since the reduction from 3CNF formula to graph can be done in

polynomial time, so MaxClique is NP-hard.

From (1) and (2) clique problem is NP complete

Hamiltonian cycle problem is NP Complete ;

Problem : A salesman wishes to make a tour visiting each city exactly once and finishing the

city he starts from. There is an integer cost c(i,j) to travel from city i to city j and salesman

wishes to make the tour whose total cost is minimum .

Here we show that HAM-CYCLE p TSP. Let G = (V,E) be an instance of HAM CYCLE. We

construct an instance of TSP as follows. We form the complete graph G =(V,E) where E ={ (i

,j)/i,j V and i j } and we define the cost function as

polynomial time. We now show that the graph G has a Hamiltonian cycle iff graph G

has a tour of cost at most 0.Suppose that graph G has a Hamiltonian cycle h. Each edge

in h belongs to E and thus has cost 0 in G. Thus h is a tour in G with cost 0.

h of cost at most 0.Since the cost of the edges in E

are 0 and 1,the cost of tour h is exactly 0 and each edge on the tour must have cost

0.Therefore h contains only edges in E. We conclude that h is a Hamiltonian cycle in

graph G.

Prove that halting problem on turing machine is undecidable.

The halting problem is to determine for an arbitrary deterministic algorithm A and an input I

whether algorithm A with input I ever terminates or enters an infinite loop.

It is well known that this problem is undecidable. We can show that satisfiabilty reduces to

halting problem by constructing an algorithm whose input is a propositional formula X. If X has

n variables then A tries out all 2 n possible assignments and verifies whether X is satisfiable. if

it is then A stops, otherwise it enters in an infinite loop. Hence A halts on input X iff X is

satisfiable.

If we had a polynomial time algorithm for the halting problem then we could solve the

satisfiability problem in polynomial time using A and X as input to the algorithm for the halting

problem.

But we already proved that satisfiability problem cannot be solved in polynomial time using

deterministic algorithm. Hence no polynomial algorithm for halting problem. Therefore halting

problem is an NP Hard problem that is not in NP

11

CIRCUITSAT

SAT

3 CNF

SAT

CLIQU

E

SUBSET SUM

VERTEX

COVER

HAM

CYCLE

TSP

Np COMPLETE PROBLEMS

Explain church Thesis

It says that No computational procedure will be considered an algorithm unless it can be

represented as a Turing machine. In other words we can say any thing which is computable

can be designed using T M. This was given by Alonzo Church in 1936. According to him T M is

equivalent to all computing model .This highlights that T M is the Ultimate for computation

POST CORRESPONDANCE PROBLEM (PCP).

The PCP was first formulated by Emit Post in 1940. Given two sequence of n strings on some

alphabets . Say X = { x1,x2,xn } and Y = {y1 , y2, yn }. Now the problem is ; Does

there exist a non empty sequence of integers i1,i2.ik such that k 1 and

xi1xi2xik =

yi1yi2.yik ?

Example : Let

Does PCP P have a solution?

Let x1 = b , x2 = c x3 = ab x4 = bca

and y1 =bc y2 = ab

sequence (1,2,3,1,4) the PCP have the solution as shown below.

b

X1

bc

Y1

ab

x2

ab

y2

x3

b

bca

x1

bc

y3

y1

x4

a

y4

12

y3 =b y4 = a. For the

The problem given an arbitrary instance of PCP, whether that instance has

a solution is undecidable

13

- A Concise Introduction to Models and Methods for Automated PlanningUploaded byroblim1
- Fundamentals of Algorithms - CS502 HandoutsUploaded byPayal Sharma
- Chapter 7Uploaded byDandu Kalyan Varma
- Lecture 21Uploaded byRichard Ding
- Advanced algorithms at a glanceUploaded byAjith Suresh
- Exam1-StudyGuideUploaded byBri Jackson
- Complexity Classes Are One Way to Talk About How dUploaded bypankaj
- A PRESENTATION ON DAA.pptxUploaded byPriyanshu Baruah
- Bi-criteria Scheduling Problems- Number of Tardy Jobs and Maximum Weighted TardinessUploaded bybiz
- ZR_07_37Uploaded bynguyenthanhdt5
- Chapter One.pdfUploaded byefrax3
- Cs 503 Design and Analysis of AlgorithmUploaded bySheikh Shabir
- Data Unit4Uploaded byPrasobh Shamohan
- Node Ranking 1Uploaded byV.m. Chitra
- CS_503_DESIGN_and_ANALYSIS_OF_ALGORITHM.pdfUploaded byHusnain Mahmood
- An Efficient Algorithm for 3D Rectangular Box PackingUploaded byDiogo Barros
- Algorithms for Sensor Systems.pdfUploaded byud
- Ingo Wegener - Complexity Theory - Exploring the Limits of Efficient Algorithms -2005, Springer.pdfUploaded byjuan
- Algorithm AnalysisUploaded byTalha Gondal
- A24_ICKEDS06017dUploaded byPamela Hendricks
- 2009s_hw1solrlaUploaded byErik Kaliev
- bin-packing-approx.pdfUploaded bysomedude111222333
- Two Mark Question BankUploaded byNavis Nayagam
- GateUploaded byharshal pawade
- dsad_cs1Uploaded byrakeshgoulikar
- Analysis of AlgorithmsUploaded byhamsdh
- Graph 3 coloring problemUploaded byDkxn
- 08102999Uploaded bybestoon82
- Hw03 Prop LogicUploaded byNiazi_sab
- 10.1016@j.ijar.2017.03.014Uploaded bySanjeev Gupta

- Logical ReasoningUploaded byayjnihhh
- muldowney.pdfUploaded bynutchai2538
- Chapter 7 dfg dgdfgUploaded byjumperpc3000
- math_inductionUploaded byمصطفى عمران
- Deontic Logic - Von Wright - 1951Uploaded bydeperogrullo
- MFCS mathematicsUploaded byJagadeesh Babu
- Basic Properties of IntegersUploaded byTom Davis
- DFS Algorithm for GraphUploaded byMayank Chauhan
- EXP-11Uploaded byTrupti Pawar
- r059210502 Mathematical Foundation of Computer ScienceUploaded byprakash.paruchuri
- Kracht Mathematics of LanguageUploaded byJason Quinley
- Ramsey Theory PresentationUploaded byAquiles Baeza
- Ababou [introduction, draft 1]Uploaded byMax Zhu
- math 10Uploaded byzxcvuno4307
- BooleanFunctions1 (1)Uploaded bynyshya22
- Ch01-2Uploaded bySharJeel Alyy
- Law of Excluded Middle - WikipediaUploaded byJayaveni Jayaveni
- Chap02cFuzzyUploaded byVishnuDhanabalan
- ds_2Uploaded byBugatti Vishal
- 3. Boolean AlgebraUploaded byUmair Zafar
- liaUploaded byRPearson860
- dm-quantifiersUploaded byNumber Yang
- Mathematical Analysis NotesUploaded byZiying Fang
- Topology - YanUploaded byahwazchagani
- Three Brief Proofs of Arrow s Impossibility TheoremUploaded byRubén Ananías
- TruthTablesForCompoundPropositionsWorksheet AnswersUploaded byYohan Ranuk Wijesinghe
- Experiment 1Uploaded bySimon কাউষ Ahmed
- Fail Predicate in Prolog PDFUploaded byStanley
- Chapter 2 Part 1 - StudUploaded byAshrafD.Zulkefly
- The Wumpus WorldUploaded bykurtkesu

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.