Theory and Applications of Models

Full download test bank at ebook textbookfull.
com
Theory and Applications of Models

of Computation 16th International
Conference TAMC 2020 Changsha China
October 18 20 2020 Proceedings
CLICK LINK TO DOWLOAD
https://textbookfull.com/product/theory-and-
applications-of-models-of-computation-16th-
international-conference-tamc-2020-changsha-
china-october-18-20-2020-proceedings-jianer-
chen/
textbookfull
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Web and Internet Economics 16th International

Conference WINE 2020 Beijing China December 7 11 2020
Proceedings Xujin Chen
https://textbookfull.com/product/web-and-internet-economics-16th-
international-conference-wine-2020-beijing-china-
december-7-11-2020-proceedings-xujin-chen/
e Learning e Education and Online Training 6th EAI

International Conference eLEOT 2020 Changsha China June
20 21 2020 Proceedings Part II Shuai Liu
https://textbookfull.com/product/e-learning-e-education-and-
online-training-6th-eai-international-conference-
eleot-2020-changsha-china-june-20-21-2020-proceedings-part-ii-
shuai-liu/
Information Systems Security 16th International

Conference ICISS 2020 Jammu India December 16 20 2020
Proceedings Salil Kanhere
https://textbookfull.com/product/information-systems-
security-16th-international-conference-iciss-2020-jammu-india-
december-16-20-2020-proceedings-salil-kanhere/
Natural Language Processing and Chinese Computing 9th

CCF International Conference NLPCC 2020 Zhengzhou China
October 14 18 2020 Proceedings Part II Xiaodan Zhu
https://textbookfull.com/product/natural-language-processing-and-
chinese-computing-9th-ccf-international-conference-
nlpcc-2020-zhengzhou-china-october-14-18-2020-proceedings-part-
Cognitive Computing ICCC 2020 4th International
Conference Held as Part of the Services Conference
Federation SCF 2020 Honolulu HI USA September 18 20
2020 Proceedings Yujiu Yang
https://textbookfull.com/product/cognitive-computing-
iccc-2020-4th-international-conference-held-as-part-of-the-
services-conference-federation-scf-2020-honolulu-hi-usa-
september-18-20-2020-proceedings-yujiu-yang/
Services Computing SCC 2020 17th International

2020 Proceedings Qingyang Wang
https://textbookfull.com/product/services-computing-
scc-2020-17th-international-conference-held-as-part-of-the-
services-conference-federation-scf-2020-honolulu-hi-usa-
september-18-20-2020-proceedings-qingyang-wang/
Cloud Computing CLOUD 2020 13th International

2020 Proceedings Qi Zhang
https://textbookfull.com/product/cloud-computing-cloud-2020-13th-
international-conference-held-as-part-of-the-services-conference-
federation-scf-2020-honolulu-hi-usa-
september-18-20-2020-proceedings-qi-zhang/
Edge Computing EDGE 2020 4th International Conference

Held as Part of the Services Conference Federation SCF
2020 Honolulu HI USA September 18 20 2020 Proceedings
Ajay Katangur
https://textbookfull.com/product/edge-computing-edge-2020-4th-
international-conference-held-as-part-of-the-services-conference-
federation-scf-2020-honolulu-hi-usa-
september-18-20-2020-proceedings-ajay-katangur/
Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision Third Chinese

Conference PRCV 2020 Nanjing China October 16 18 2020
Proceedings Part III Yuxin Peng
https://textbookfull.com/product/pattern-recognition-and-
computer-vision-third-chinese-conference-prcv-2020-nanjing-china-
october-16-18-2020-proceedings-part-iii-yuxin-peng/
Jianer Chen
Qilong Feng
Jinhui Xu (Eds.)
LNCS 12337
Theory and Applications

of Models of Computation
16th International Conference, TAMC 2020
Changsha, China, October 18–20, 2020
Proceedings
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 12337
Founding Editors
Gerhard Goos
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
Juris Hartmanis
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Editorial Board Members

Elisa Bertino
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
Wen Gao
Peking University, Beijing, China
Bernhard Steffen
TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
Gerhard Woeginger
RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
Moti Yung
Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/7407
Jianer Chen Qilong Feng
• •
Jinhui Xu (Eds.)
Theory and Applications

of Models of Computation
16th International Conference, TAMC 2020
Changsha, China, October 18–20, 2020
Proceedings
123
Editors
Jianer Chen Qilong Feng
Department of Computer Science School of Computer Science
Texas A&M University and Engineering
College Station, TX, USA Central South University
Changsha, China
Jinhui Xu
Department of Computer Science
and Engineering
State University of New York at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY, USA
ISSN 0302-9743 ISSN 1611-3349 (electronic)

Lecture Notes in Computer Science
ISBN 978-3-030-59266-0 ISBN 978-3-030-59267-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59267-7
LNCS Sublibrary: SL1 – Theoretical Computer Science and General Issues
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the
material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are
believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors
give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or
omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface
The 16th Annual Conference on Theory and Applications of Models of Computation

(TAMC 2020) was held during October 18–20, 2020, in Changsha, China. The
workshop brings together researchers working on all aspects of computer science for
the exchange of ideas and results.
TAMC 2020 was the 16th conference in the series. The main themes of TAMC
2020 were computability, complexity, algorithms, information theory and their
extensions to machine learning theory, and foundations of artificial intelligence.
83 submissions were received from more than 13 countries and regions. The TAMC
2020 Program Committee selected 37 papers for presentation at the conference. In
addition, we had two plenary speakers, Gregory Gutin (Royal Holloway, University of
London, UK) and Xianfeng David Gu (State University of New York at Stony Brook,
USA). Thanks for their contributions to the conference and proceedings.
We would like to thank the Program Committee members and external reviewers for
their hard work in reviewing and selecting papers. We are also very grateful to all the
authors who submitted their work to TAMC 2020. We thank the members of the
Editorial Board who agreed to publish this volume in the Lecture Notes in Computer
Science series and the editors at Springer for their encouragement, cooperation, and
hard work throughout the preparation of these proceedings.
May 2020 Jianer Chen

Qilong Feng
Jinhui Xu
Organization
Program Committee
Anthony Bonato Ryerson University, Canada
Yixin Cao The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong,
China
Jianer Chen Texas A&M University, USA
Hu Ding University of Science and Technology of China, China
Thomas Erlebach University of Leicester, UK
Qilong Feng Central South University, China
Seok-Hee Hong The University of Sydney, Australia
Ziyun Huang Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, USA
Aaron D. Jaggard U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, USA
Steffen Lempp University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
Jian Li Tsinghua University, China
Shi Li State University of New York at Buffalo, USA
Mia Minnes University of California, San Diego, USA
Evanthia Papadopoulou University of Lugano (USI), Switzerland
A. Pavan Iowa State University, USA
Anil Seth IIT Kanpur, India
Xiaoming Sun Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy
of Sciences, China
Shin-Ichi Tanigawa The University of Tokyo, Japan
Takeshi Tokuyama Tohoku University, Japan
Haitao Wang Utah State University, USA
Lusheng Wang City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Ge Xia Lafayette College, USA
Jinhui Xu State University of New York at Buffalo, USA
Boting Yang University of Regina, Canada
Christos Zaroliagis CTI, University of Patras, Greece
Guochuan Zhang Zhejiang University, China
Huaming Zhang University of Alabama in Huntsville, China
Martin Ziegler KAIST, China
viii Organization
Additional Reviewers
Abam, Mohammad Ali Loff, Bruno

Ackerman, Eyal Lukovszki, Tamas
Coiteux-Roy, Xavier Martin, Keye
Crole, Roy Niewerth, Matthias
Della Vedova, Gianluca Nomikos, Christos
Deng, Shichuan Qin, Ruizhe
Eiben, Eduard Quanrud, Kent
Fujii, Kaito Rajagopal Padmanabhan, Madhavan
Guan, Chaowen Shi, Feng
Higashikawa, Yuya Shioura, Akiyoshi
Hitchcock, John M. Soma, Tasuku
Horn, Paul Tsichlas, Kostas
Huang, Jiawei Variyam, Vinodchandran
Huang, Lingxiao lachos, Evangelos
Huang, Zengfeng Voudouris, Alexandros
Iwamasa, Yuni Wang, Di
Jiang, Zhihao Wang, Minghua
Jung, Achim Wang, Zixiu
Kanellopoulos, Panagiotis Ward, Justin
Kawachi, Akinori Yang, Fan
Kontogiannis, Spyros Yu, Haikuo
Krishnaswamy, Ravishankar Yu, Wei
Kulkarni, Janardhan Zhang, Peng
LeGall, Francois Zhang, Tianyi
Li, Wenjun Zhou, Yufan
Contents
Semilattices of Punctual Numberings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Nikolay Bazhenov, Manat Mustafa, and Sergei Ospichev
Partial Sums on the Ultra-Wide Word RAM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Philip Bille, Inge Li Gørtz, and Frederik Rye Skjoldjensen
Securely Computing the n-Variable Equality Function with 2n Cards . . . . . . 25

Suthee Ruangwises and Toshiya Itoh
Polynomial Kernels for Paw-Free Edge Modification Problems . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Yixin Cao, Yuping Ke, and Hanchun Yuan
Floorplans with Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Katsuhisa Yamanaka and Shin-ichi Nakano
A Primal-Dual Randomized Algorithm for the Online Weighted

Set Multi-cover Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Wenbin Chen, Fufang Li, Ke Qi, Miao Liu, and Maobin Tang
Sumcheck-Based Delegation of Quantum Computing to Rational Server . . . . 69

Yuki Takeuchi, Tomoyuki Morimae, and Seiichiro Tani
Online Removable Knapsack Problems for Integer-Sized Items . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Kanaho Hanji, Hiroshi Fujiwara, and Hiroaki Yamamoto
An Improved Approximation Algorithm for the Prize-Collecting

Red-Blue Median Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Zhen Zhang, Yutian Guo, and Junyu Huang
LP-Based Algorithms for Computing Maximum Vertex-Disjoint Paths

with Different Colors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Yunyun Deng, Yi Chen, Kewen Liao, and Longkun Guo
A Constant Factor Approximation for Lower-Bounded k-Median . . . . . . . . . 119

Yutian Guo, Junyu Huang, and Zhen Zhang
Reverse Mathematics, Projective Modules and Invertible Modules. . . . . . . . . 132

Huishan Wu
Two-Stage Submodular Maximization Problem Beyond Non-negative

and Monotone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Zhicheng Liu, Hong Chang, Ran Ma, Donglei Du, and Xiaoyan Zhang
x Contents
Optimal Matroid Bases with Intersection Constraints: Valuated Matroids,

M-convex Functions, and Their Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Yuni Iwamasa and Kenjiro Takazawa
On the Complexity of Acyclic Modules in Automata Networks . . . . . . . . . . 168

Kévin Perrot, Pacôme Perrotin, and Sylvain Sené
Eternal Connected Vertex Cover Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Toshihiro Fujito and Tomoya Nakamura
Parametric Streaming Two-Stage Submodular Maximization. . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Ruiqi Yang, Dachuan Xu, Longkun Guo, and Dongmei Zhang
Approximation Guarantees for Deterministic Maximization of Submodular

Function with a Matroid Constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Xin Sun, Dachuan Xu, Longkun Guo, and Min Li
A Novel Initialization Algorithm for Fuzzy C-means Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 215

Qian Liu, Jianxin Liu, Min Li, and Yang Zhou
On the Parameterized Complexity of d-Restricted Boolean Net Synthesis . . . . 226

Ronny Tredup and Evgeny Erofeev
Approximate #Knapsack Computations to Count Semi-fair Allocations . . . . . 239

Theofilos Triommatis and Aris Pagourtzis
Characterizations and Approximability of Hard Counting Classes

Below #P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Eleni Bakali, Aggeliki Chalki, and Aris Pagourtzis
On Existence of Equilibrium Under Social Coalition Structures. . . . . . . . . . . 263

Bugra Caskurlu, Ozgun Ekici, and Fatih Erdem Kizilkaya
Space Complexity of Streaming Algorithms on Universal Quantum

Computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Yanglin Hu, Darya Melnyk, Yuyi Wang, and Roger Wattenhofer
On Coresets for Support Vector Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

Murad Tukan, Cenk Baykal, Dan Feldman, and Daniela Rus
Tractabilities for Tree Assembly Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

Feng Shi, Jie You, Zhen Zhang, and Jingyi Liu
On Characterization of Petrie Partitionable Plane Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Xin He and Huaming Zhang
Disjunctive Propositional Logic and Scott Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

Longchun Wang and Qingguo Li
Contents xi
Dispersing and Grouping Points on Segments in the Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340

Xiaozhou He, Wenfeng Lai, Binhai Zhu, and Peng Zou
Synchronizing Words and Monoid Factorization: A Parameterized

Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
Jens Bruchertseifer and Henning Fernau
Hidden Community Detection on Two-Layer Stochastic Models:

A Theoretical Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
Jialu Bao, Kun He, Xiaodong Xin, Bart Selman, and John E. Hopcroft
A Primal-Dual Algorithm for Euclidean k-Means Problem with Penalties . . . . 377

Chunying Ren, Dachuan Xu, Donglei Du, and Min Li
The Complexity of the Partition Coloring Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390

Zhenyu Guo, Mingyu Xiao, and Yi Zhou
FPT Algorithms for Generalized Feedback Vertex Set Problems . . . . . . . . . . 402

Bin Sheng
Fixed-Order Book Thickness with Respect to the Vertex-Cover Number:

New Observations and Further Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
Yunlong Liu, Jie Chen, and Jingui Huang
Acyclic Edge Coloring Conjecture Is True on Planar Graphs Without

Intersecting Triangles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426
Qiaojun Shu, Yong Chen, Shuguang Han, Guohui Lin, Eiji Miyano,
and An Zhang
On Pure Space vs Catalytic Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439

Sagar Bisoyi, Krishnamoorthy Dinesh, and Jayalal Sarma
Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453

Semilattices of Punctual Numberings
Nikolay Bazhenov1,2(B) , Manat Mustafa3 , and Sergei Ospichev1,2

1
Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, 4 Acad. Koptyug Avenue,
Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
2
Novosibirsk State University, 2 Pirogova St., Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
{bazhenov,ospichev}@math.nsc.ru
3
Department of Mathematics, School of Sciences and Humanities,
Nazarbayev University, 53 Qabanbaybatyr Avenue, Nur-Sultan 010000, Kazakhstan
[email protected]
Abstract. The theory of numberings studies uniform computations for

classes of mathematical objects. A large body of literature is devoted to
investigations of computable numberings, i.e. uniform enumerations for
families of computably enumerable sets, and the reducibility ≤ among
these numberings. This reducibility, induced by Turing computable func-
tions, aims to classify the algorithmic complexity of numberings.
The paper is inspired by the recent advances in the area of punctual
algebraic structures. We recast the classical studies of numberings in the
punctual setting—we study punctual numberings, i.e. uniform computa-
tions for families of primitive recursive functions. The reducibility ≤pr
between punctual numberings is induced by primitive recursive func-
tions. This approach gives rise to upper semilattices of degrees, which
are called Rogers pr-semilattices. We prove that any infinite Rogers pr-
semilattice is dense and does not have minimal elements. Furthermore,
we give an example of infinite Rogers pr-semilattice, which is a lattice.
These results exhibit interesting phenomena, which do not occur in the
classical case of computable numberings and their semilattices.
Keywords: Numbering · Upper semilattice · Rogers semilattice ·

Primitive recursion · Friedberg numbering · Online computation ·
Punctual structure
1 Introduction
The theory of numberings gives a formal approach to studying uniform computa-
tions for classes of mathematical objects. One of the first important applications
of this theory is provided by Gödel [15], who employed an effective numbering of
The work was supported by Nazarbayev University Faculty Development Competitive
Research Grants N090118FD5342. The first author was partially supported by the
grant of the President of the Russian Federation (No. MK-1214.2019.1). The third
author was partially supported by the program of fundamental scientific researches of
the SB RAS No. I.1.1, project No. 0314-2019-0002.
c Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
J. Chen et al. (Eds.): TAMC 2020, LNCS 12337, pp. 1–12, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59267-7_1
2 N. Bazhenov et al.
first-order formulae in the proof of his seminal incompleteness theorems. Kleene’s

results [24], in a sense, created numberings as a separate object of study: in par-
ticular, he constructed a universal partial computable function. After that, the
foundations of the modern theory of numberings were developed by Kolmogorov
and Uspenskii [25,35] and, independently, by Rogers [33].
Let S be a countable set. A numbering of S is a surjective map ν from the
set of natural numbers ω onto S. A standard tool for measuring the algorith-
mic complexity of numberings is provided by the notion of reducibility between
numberings: A numbering ν is reducible to another numbering μ (denoted by
ν ≤ μ) if there is total computable function f (x) such that ν(n) = μ(f (n)) for
all n ∈ ω. In other words, there is an effective procedure which, given a ν-index
of an object from S, computes a μ-index for the same object.
Since 1960s, the investigations of computable numberings have become a fruit-
ful area of research. Let S be a countable family of computably enumerable (c.e.)
sets. A numbering ν of the family S is computable if the set
{n, x : n ∈ ω, x ∈ ν(n)}
is c.e. The family S is computable if it has a computable numbering. Informally
speaking, the computability of S means that there is a procedure, which provides
a uniform enumeration of the family S.
In a standard recursion-theoretic way, the notion of reducibility between
numberings give rise to the Rogers upper semilattice (or Rogers semilattice for
short) of a computable family S: This semilattice contains the degrees of all com-
putable numberings of S. Here two numberings have the same degree if they are
reducible to each other. Rogers semilattices allow one to measure computations
of a given family and also used as a tool to classify properties of computable
numberings for different families.
To name only a few, computable numberings and the corresponding Rogers
semilattices were studied by Badaev [3,4], Ershov [11,12], Friedberg [14], Gon-
charov [16,17], Lachlan [26,27], Mal’tsev [28], Pour-El [32], Selivanov [34], and
many other researchers. Note that computable numberings are closely connected
to algorithmic learning theory (see, e.g., the recent papers [1,9,21]). For a survey
of results and bibliographical references on computable numberings, the reader
is referred to the monograph [12] and the articles [2,5,13].
Goncharov and Sorbi [19] started developing the theory of generalized
computable numberings: roughly speaking, these numberings provide uniform
descriptions for families of sets belonging to the levels of various computabi-
lity-theoretic hierarchies. In this direction, much work has been done for the
hyperarithmetical hierarchy [2,7,31] and the Ershov hierarchy [6,18,20,30].
The prior investigations in the theory of numberings are mainly motivated
by the general area of computable or effective mathematics. This area aims to
understand and calibrate the algorithmic content of mathematical objects. The
roots of this direction go back to the introduction of non-recursive mathematical
methods at the beginning of the 20th century, as discussed in [29]. Following the
agenda of computable mathematics, the theory of numberings generally employs
the Turing computability framework.
Semilattices of Punctual Numberings 3
Our paper is inspired by the recent developments in computable structure

theory: Kalimullin, Melnikov, and Ng [22] introduced the notion of a punctual (or
fully primitive recursive) structure. An infinite structure S in a finite signature
is punctual if the domain of S is equal to ω, and the basic functions and relations
of S are primitive recursive.
The notion of punctuality essentially eliminates all instances of unbounded
search in Turing computable algorithms. This feature allows one to mimic any
reasonable “online” algorithm, i.e. an algorithm, which has to make decisions
on the fly. A typical example of such an algorithm is online colouring, say, of
a tree: given the nth vertex of an input tree, you have to decide its colour
right at the moment (you cannot wait for the (n + 1)-th vertex to appear). The
reader is referred to the survey [8] for a detailed discussion of the motivation
behind punctuality, the known results in this area, and further bibliographical
references.
The aim of this paper is to introduce online computational models into the
study of numberings. Our approach is based on the punctuality paradigm of
[8,22].
Definition 1.1. Let S be a family of total functions acting from ω into ω. We

say that a numbering ν of the family S is punctual if the function
gν (n, x) := (ν(n))(x)
is primitive recursive. A family S is punctual if it has a punctual numbering.
Informally speaking, the punctuality of S means that one can promptly

(and uniformly) compute every function from S. The punctuality paradigm
requires that we have to modify the notion of the reduction between numberings
accordingly:
Definition 1.2. Let ν and μ be numberings. We say that ν is punctually

reducible to μ, denoted by ν ≤pr μ, if there is a primitive recursive function
f : ω → ω such that
ν(n) = μ(f (n)), for all n ∈ ω.
In this case, we say that f punctually reduces ν to μ.
In a natural way, Definitions 1.1 and 1.2 give rise to the notion of Rogers
pr-semilattice of a punctual family S, see Sect. 2 for a formal definition. Most
of the problems on numberings in terms of Rogers semilattices, in the general
setting, can be formulated as follows:
– Find global algebraic properties of Rogers semilattices (such as cardinality,

type of the algebraic structure, ideals, segments, covers, etc.)
– Describe invariants, and among them the number of maximal and minimal
elements, to distinguish different Rogers semilattices.
– Classify numberings which generate special elements in Rogers semilattices
(extremal elements, limit points, split elements, etc.).
Based on the motivation above, in our paper we show that the theory of
punctual numberings exhibits striking differences with the classical numbering
theory—The main results of the article can be summarized as follows. Let S be
an infinite punctual family.
– Below an arbitrary degree from Rpr (S), one can build an infinite descending
chain and an infinite antichain (Theorems 3.1 and 4.1). In contrast, in the
classical setting, the Rogers semilattice of, say, the family T0 := {∅}∪{{i} : i ∈
ω} has the least element.
– The semilattice Rpr (S) is dense (Theorem 6.1), i.e. given two degrees a < b,
there is always a degree c with a < c < b. On the other hand, standard
recursion-theoretic methods show that the classical Rogers semilattice of T0
has an initial segment containing precisely two degrees.
– There is a simple example of a family S1 such that the structure Rpr (S1 ) is
an infinite lattice (Proposition 5.1). Note that Selivanov [34] proved that any
infinite classical Rogers semilattice cannot be a lattice.
The proofs of these results employ some techniques developed for finitely gener-
ated punctual structures in [22] and Section 7 of [8].
2 Preliminaries and General Facts

Given a total function f : ω → ω and a non-zero natural number m, by f m
we denote the following tuple:
f m := (f (0), f (1), . . . , f (m − 1)).
For a set A ⊆ ω, by χA we denote the characteristic function of A. For a pair of

natural numbers (k, ), the value k, is its standard Cantor index, i.e.
(k + )(k + + 1)
k, = + k.
2
Suppose that ν is a numbering of a family S0 , and μ is a numbering of a
family S1 . Note that the condition ν ≤ μ always implies that S0 ⊆ S1 . Clearly,
if ν ≤pr μ, then ν ≤ μ.
Numberings ν and μ are equivalent (denoted by ν ≡ μ) if ν ≤ μ and μ ≤ ν.
The punctual equivalence ≡pr is defined in a similar way. The numbering ν ⊕ μ
of the family S0 ∪ S1 is defined as follows:
(ν ⊕ μ)(2x) = ν(x), (ν ⊕ μ)(2x + 1) = μ(x).
It is not hard to establish the following fact (see, e.g., Proposition 3 in [12,
p. 36]). If ∈ {≤, ≤pr } and ξ is a numbering of a family S2 , then
(ν ξ & μ ξ) ⇔ (ν ⊕ μ ξ).
Let S be a punctual family of functions. By Compr (S) we denote the set of all
punctual numberings of S. Since the relation ≡pr is a congruence on the structure
(Compr (S); ≤pr , ⊕), we use the same symbols ≤pr and ⊕ on numberings of S
and on ≡pr -equivalence classes of these numberings.
The quotient structure Rpr (S) := (Compr (S)/≡pr ; ≤pr , ⊕) is an upper semi-
lattice. We call the structure Rpr (S) the Rogers pr-semilattice of the punctual
family S.
Let T be a family of (Turing) computable functions acting from ω into ω. A
numbering ν of the family T is computable if the function gν from Definition 1.1 is
computable. Note that this definition is consistent with the notion of computable
numbering from the introduction: If we identify functions from T with their
graphs, then we will get precisely the same notions.
We say that a family T is Turing computable if it has a computable number-
ing. The definition of Rogers semilattice Rc (T ) is obtained in a similar way to
the semilattice Rpr (S), modulo the following modification: one needs to consider
all computable numberings of T and the standard reducibility ≤ between them.
If ν is a numbering, then by ην we denote the corresponding equivalence
relation on ω:
m ην n ⇔ ν(m) = ν(n).
A numbering ν is negative if the relation ην is co-c.e., i.e. ην is the complement
of a c.e. set. A numbering ν is decidable if the relation ην is (Turing) computable.
Numbering ν is Friedberg if ην is the identity relation.
2.1 Basics of Punctuality

The restricted Church–Turing thesis for primitive recursive functions says the
following: A function is primitive recursive if and only if it can be described
by an algorithm that uses only bounded loops. Informally speaking, one needs
to eliminate all instances of while ... do, repeat ... until, and goto in a
Pascal-like programming language.
Our proofs will exploit the restricted Church–Turing thesis without an
explicit reference.
We fix a computable list (pe )e∈ω of all unary primitive recursive functions.
We emphasize that the list is computable, but it cannot be primitive recursive.
Nevertheless, the following function can be treated as a punctual object:
⎧
⎪
⎨pe (x), if the value pe (x) is computed in
pe [t](x) := at most t computational steps,
⎪
⎩
undefined, otherwise.
Without loss of generality, one may also assume the following: if pe (x) is equal
to N , then for any t ≤ max(e, x, N ), the value pe [t](x) is undefined. The formal
details can be recovered from Section 10 of [8].
2.2 First Facts About Punctual Numberings

Proposition 2.1. Let S be a finite punctual family. Then the semilattice
Rpr (S) contains precisely one element.
Proof. Suppose that S = {f0 , f1 , . . . , fm }. We fix a natural number N such that

the strings fi N , i ≤ m, are pairwise different.
It is sufficient to establish the following fact: For arbitrary punctual number-
ings ν and μ of S, one can build a function g, which punctually reduces ν to
μ.
The desired g is constructed as follows. We fix indices ai , i ≤ m, such that
μ(ai ) = fi . For an arbitrary index k ∈ ω, we promptly find the number j ≤ m
such that ν(k) N = fj N . Then we define g(k) := aj .
Let T be an infinite, Turing computable family of functions. Mal’tsev [28]

showed that every computable numbering of T is negative. Ershov [10] proved
that for any computable numbering ν of T , there is a computable Friedberg
numbering μ of T such that μ ≤ ν.
Here we adapt these facts to the punctual setting.
Definition 2.1. Let S be a punctual family, and let ν be a punctual numbering

of S. We say that ν is strongly punctually decidable (or spd for short) if it
satisfies the following:
1. the equivalence relation ην is primitive recursive, and

2. for any ην -equivalence class C, either C contains only one element, or C =
[0]ην .
Proposition 2.2. Suppose that S is a punctual family, and ν is a punctual

numbering of S. Then:
(a) ν is negative, and

(b) there is a strongly punctually decidable numbering μ ∈ Compr (S) such that
μ ≤pr ν.
Proof. The item (a) is an easy corollary of the Mal’tsev’s result mentioned above.
We sketch the proof of the item (b).
Since the numbering ν is negative, the set
Iν := {n ∈ ω : (∀i < n)(ν(i) = ν(n))}
is computably enumerable. Choose a primitive recursive function h such that

range(h) = Iν . We define a new primitive recursive function

h(x), if (∀i < x)(h(i) = h(x)),
h(x) :=
h(0), otherwise.
The desired numbering is defined as μ := ν ◦ h. It is not hard to establish that

μ satisfies the conditions of the proposition.
3 Warming Up: Absence of Minimal Elements

The section contains an introduction to punctual constructions: we give a
detailed proof of the result below, which serves as a good starting point.
Theorem 3.1. Let S be an infinite punctual family. Then the semilattice

Rpr (S) does not contain minimal elements. Consequently, the structure Rpr (S)
is infinite.
Proof. Let α be a punctual numbering of S. By Proposition 2.2, there is a spd

numbering ν ∈ Compr (S) such that ν ≤pr α. In order to prove the theorem, we
build a numbering μ ∈ Compr (S) such that μ ≤pr ν and ν pr μ.
Our construction will satisfy the following series of requirements:
Pe : The function pe does not punctually reduce ν to μ.

The key difference between our construction and a typical injury argument
(of recursion theory) is the following: Our requirements do not injure each other,
and we will satisfy only one requirement Pe at a time.
Strategy for Pe . Suppose that the Pe -strategy starts working at a stage se of
the construction, and N e is the least index such that the object μ(N e ) is still
undefined at the beginning of the stage se .
We wait until the first stage t > se with the following properties:
(a) There is a (least) number we ≤ t such that we ≥ e, ν(we ) = ν(0), and we

have not used the object ν(we ) in our definition of μ before.
(b) For this particular we , the value pe [t](we ) is already defined.
Note that checking whether ν(we ) is equal to ν(0) is a punctual procedure, since
the numbering ν is spd.
While waiting for this t to appear, we should not delay the definition of the
numbering μ, so, one by one, we put:
μ(N e ) := ν(0), μ(N e + 1) := ν(0), μ(N e + 2) := ν(0), . . . .
When the desired stage t is achieved, we proceed as follows:
1. For each k ≤ pe (we ), if the object μ(k) is still undefined, then put μ(k) :=
ν(0).
2. Let m be the least index such that at this moment, μ(m) is still undefined.
Set μ(m + ) := ν(), for every ≤ we .
It is clear that the described actions ensure that the requirement Pe is for-
ever satisfied: Our choice of the witness we guarantees that we have ν(we ) =
μ(pe (we )).
The construction is arranged as follows: We start the P0 -strategy and wait
until it is satisfied. When P0 is satisfied, we immediately start the P1 -strategy.
After P1 is satisfied, we start P2 , etc.
Verification. Since the family S is infinite, each strategy Pe will eventually

find its witness we , and after that, Pe will eventually become satisfied. Therefore,
we deduce ν pr μ.
The constructed numbering μ is punctual: Indeed, for an index k ∈ ω, one
can just look at the stage k + 1 of the described construction. At this stage k + 1,
we can promptly find an index r(k) such that μ(k) is equal to ν(r(k)). This
shows the punctuality of μ, and furthermore, the function r punctually reduces
μ to ν.
Informally speaking, the punctuality of μ is ensured by elimination of
unbounded searches: Surely, the Pe -strategy wants to “catch” a particularly
good stage t, but this quest for t does not delay the construction at all—while
doing the t-search, our definition of μ just executes a straightforward filler action
(copying ν(0) for appropriate μ-indices).
Now it is enough to show that the numbering μ has an index for every element
of S. This is ensured by the assignment μ(m + ) := ν() given above—after
satisfying Pe , μ copies the long initial segment ν(0), ν(1), . . . , ν(we ).
The classical result of Khutoretskii [23] shows that for any computable family
T , its semilattice Rc (T ) is either one-element, or infinite. Proposition 2.1 and
Theorem 3.1 together imply that the punctual setting exhibits a similar behavior:
Corollary 3.1. For an arbitrary punctual family S, its Rogers pr-semilattice is

either one-element or infinite.
4 Infinite Antichain
Theorem 4.1. Let S be an infinite punctual family, and β be a punctual num-

bering of S. Then the semilattice Rpr (S) contains an infinite antichain under
the degree of β.
Proof. Here we give a construction, which builds two ≤pr -incomparable punctual
numberings ν and μ of S. This construction admits a straightforward general-
ization to the case of countably many incomparable elements.
We apply Proposition 2.2 and fix a spd numbering α of the family S such
that α ≤pr β. Our numberings ν and μ will copy different pieces of α. We satisfy
the following series of requirements:
Pe : pe : ν pr μ, i.e. pe does not punctually reduce ν to μ.

Qi : pi : μ pr ν.
We fix a (punctual) ordering of the requirements: P0 < Q0 < P1 < Q1 < . . . .

This means that we will satisfy P0 , then Q0 , then P1 , etc.
The Pe - and Qi -requirements are very similar, so we give a description only
for a Pe -strategy. Essentially, this is a slightly modified version of the strategy
from Theorem 3.1.
The Pe -strategy. By the background action of the Pe -strategy, we mean the

following: Whenever we are waiting for some object to be found, we do not delay
our construction, and we just put
ν(N ) = μ(N ) := α(0), ν(N + 1) = μ(N + 1) := α(0), . . . ,
starting with an appropriate index N . This N is typically clear from the context
(recall the N e from Theorem 3.1).
The strategy Pe waits until the first (large enough) stage t with the following
property: There is an index w ≤ t such that α(w) = α(0), and the object α(w)
has not been employed in the construction before.
When this w is found, we choose the least me such that ν(me ) is still unde-
fined, and we set ν(me ) := α(w). We wait for the first stage t1 such that the
value pe [t1 ](me ) is defined. After that, proceed as follows:
– For every k ≤ pe (me ), if μ(k) is still undefined, then put μ(k) := α(0).
– Ensure that both μ and ν copy pieces of α: set μ(N0 + ) = ν(N1 + ) := α(),
where ≤ w and the indices N0 , N1 are chosen in an appropriate way.
These actions guarantee that ν(me ) = α(w) = μ(pe (me )), and the Pe -
requirement is satisfied.
The Qi -strategy is essentially the same as that of Pe , modulo the following
modification: ν and μ need to switch places in the strategy description.
The construction is arranged similarly to Theorem 3.1: our requirements are
satisified one by one, according to their priority ordering.
Verification mimics that of Theorem 3.1. Clearly, the numberings ν and μ
are ≤pr -incomparable. Moreover, they are punctual, and both of them can be
punctually reduced to α. The copying of large α-pieces implies that both ν and
μ index the whole family S.
5 Lattices
Selivanov [34] obtained the following result: For any computable family T , if the
semilattice Rc (T ) is infinite, then it cannot be a lattice.
The propositions of this section show that the result of Selivanov cannot be
transferred to the punctual setting: Sometimes, an infinite Rpr (S) is a lattice,
and sometimes it is not.
Proposition 5.1. Let S be a punctual family containing the following functions:
for i ∈ ω,
gi (x) := i, for all x.
Then the structure Rpr (S) is an infinite lattice with the greatest element.
For reasons of space, the proof of Proposition 5.1 is omitted.
Proposition 5.2. There exists an infinite punctual family S such that the semi-
lattice Rpr (S) contains a minimal pair. Consequently, Rpr (S) is not a lattice.
The desired family S of Proposition 5.2 is defined via its punctual Friedberg
numbering: for k, ∈ ω, set νk, 0 := χ{2k} and νk, + 1 := χ{2k,2+1} . For
reasons of space, further proof is omitted.
6 Density
Recall that Theorem 3.1 proves that every infinite Rogers pr-semilattice is down-
wards dense. Proposition 5.1 gives an example of infinite Rpr (S) having the
greatest element. Thus, in general, pr-semilattices are not upwards dense.
This section contains two results. First, we provide an example of upwards
dense pr-semilattice. After that, we establish a general result (Theorem 6.1)
which proves density for an arbitrary infinite Rpr (S).
Proposition 6.1. Let S be a punctual family containing the following functions:

gi := χ{i} , for i ∈ ω. Then the structure Rpr (S) does not have maximal elements.
Proof (sketch). Let ν be an arbitrary punctual numbering of the family S. In

order to prove the proposition, we want to build a punctual numbering μ of some
subfamily S0 ⊆ S such that μ pr ν. Indeed, the existence of such μ is sufficient
for us, since this implies that ν ≤pr ν ⊕ μ and ν ⊕ μ pr ν.
We satisfy the series of requirements
Pe : pe : μ pr ν.
The Pe -strategy. Choose the least w such that we have not talked about the
object μ(w) before. Wait for the least stage s such that the value pe [s](w) is
defined, and there is a number N ≤ s with (ν(pe (w)))(N ) = 1.
While waiting for this s, just propagate
μ(w)(0) := 0, μ(w)(1) := 0, μ(w)(2) := 0, . . . .
When the stage s and the corresponding N is found, set μ(w) := χ{N +s+1} .
The construction is arranged in a straightforward way. We note that in order
to ensure the punctuality of μ, the Pe -strategy also has to implement some simple
background actions—e.g., one by one, we set μ(w + 1) := χ{0} , μ(w + 2) := χ{0} ,
etc.
Clearly, μ indexes a subfamily of S. Since every Pe is eventually satisfied, we
have μ pr ν.
Theorem 6.1. Let S be an infinite punctual family. Suppose that ν and μ are
punctual numberings of S such that ν <pr μ, i.e. ν ≤pr μ and ν ≡pr μ. Then
there is a numbering ξ ∈ Compr (S) such that ν <pr ξ <pr μ.
For reasons of space, the proof of Theorem 6.1 is omitted.
Acknowledgements. Part of the research contained in this paper was carried out
while the first and the last authors were visiting the Department of Mathematics of
Nazarbayev University, Nur-Sultan. The authors wish to thank Nazarbayev University
for its hospitality.
References
1. Ambos-Spies, K., Badaev, S., Goncharov, S.: Inductive inference and computable
numberings. Theor. Comput. Sci. 412(18), 1652–1668 (2011). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tcs.2010.12.041
2. Badaev, S., Goncharov, S.: Computability and numberings. In: Cooper, S.B., Löwe,
B., Sorbi, A. (eds.) New Computational Paradigms, pp. 19–34. Springer, New York
(2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68546-5 2
3. Badaev, S.A.: Computable enumerations of families of general recursive functions.
Algebra Log. 16(2), 83–98 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01668593
4. Badaev, S.A.: Minimal numerations of positively computable families. Algebra Log.
33(3), 131–141 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00750228
5. Badaev, S.A., Goncharov, S.S.: Theory of numberings: open problems. In: Cholak,
P., Lempp, S., Lerman, M., Shore, R. (eds.) Computability Theory and Its Appli-
cations, Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 257, pp. 23–38. American Mathematical
Society, Providence (2000). https://doi.org/10.1090/conm/257/04025
6. Badaev, S.A., Lempp, S.: A decomposition of the Rogers semilattice of a family
of d.c.e. sets. J. Symb. Logic 74(2), 618–640 (2009). https://doi.org/10.2178/jsl/
1243948330
7. Bazhenov, N., Mustafa, M., Yamaleev, M.: Elementary theories and hereditary
undecidability for semilattices of numberings. Arch. Math. Log. 58(3–4), 485–500
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-018-0647-y
8. Bazhenov, N., Downey, R., Kalimullin, I., Melnikov, A.: Foundations of online
structure theory. Bull. Symb. Log. 25(2), 141–181 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/
bsl.2019.20
9. Case, J., Jain, S., Stephan, F.: Effectivity questions for Kleene’s recursion theorem.
Theor. Comput. Sci. 733, 55–70 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2018.04.036
10. Ershov, Y.L.: Enumeration of families of general recursive functions. Sib. Math. J.
8(5), 771–778 (1967). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01040653
11. Ershov, Y.L.: On computable enumerations. Algebra Log. 7(5), 330–346 (1968).
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02219286
12. Ershov, Y.L.: Theory of Numberings. Nauka, Moscow (1977). (in Russian)
13. Ershov, Y.L.: Theory of numberings. In: Griffor, E.R. (ed.) Handbook of Com-
putability Theory. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 140,
pp. 473–503. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-
237X(99)80030-5
14. Friedberg, R.M.: Three theorems on recursive enumeration. I. Decomposition. II.
Maximal set. III. Enumeration without duplication. J. Symb. Log. 23(3), 309–316
(1958). https://doi.org/10.2307/2964290
15. Gödel, K.: Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und
verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38(1), 173–198
(1931). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01700692
16. Goncharov, S.S.: Computable single-valued numerations. Algebra Log. 19(5), 325–
356 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01669607
17. Goncharov, S.S.: Positive numerations of families with one-valued numerations.
Algebra Log. 22(5), 345–350 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01982111
18. Goncharov, S.S., Lempp, S., Solomon, D.R.: Friedberg numberings of families of
n-computably enumerable sets. Algebra Log. 41(2), 81–86 (2002). https://doi.org/
10.1023/A:1015352513117
19. Goncharov, S.S., Sorbi, A.: Generalized computable numerations and nontrivial
Rogers semilattices. Algebra Log. 36(6), 359–369 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02671553
20. Herbert, I., Jain, S., Lempp, S., Mustafa, M., Stephan, F.: Reductions between
types of numberings. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 170(12), 102716 (2019). https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apal.2019.102716
21. Jain, S., Stephan, F.: Numberings optimal for learning. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 76(3–
4), 233–250 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2009.08.001
22. Kalimullin, I., Melnikov, A., Ng, K.M.: Algebraic structures computable without
delay. Theor. Comput. Sci. 674, 73–98 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2017.
01.029
23. Khutoretskii, A.B.: On the cardinality of the upper semilattice of computable
enumerations. Algebra Log. 10(5), 348–352 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02219842
24. Kleene, S.C.: Introduction to Metamathematics. Van Nostrand, New York (1952)
25. Kolmogorov, A.N., Uspenskii, V.A.: On the definition of an algorithm. Uspehi Mat.
Nauk. 13(4), 3–28 (1958). (in Russian)
26. Lachlan, A.H.: Standard classes of recursively enumerable sets. Z. Math.
Logik Grundlagen Math. 10(2–3), 23–42 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1002/malq.
19640100203
27. Lachlan, A.H.: On recursive enumeration without repetition. Z. Math.
Logik Grundlagen Math. 11(3), 209–220 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1002/malq.
19650110305
28. Mal’cev, A.I.: Positive and negative numerations. Sov. Math. Dokl. 6, 75–77 (1965)
29. Metakides, G., Nerode, A.: The introduction of nonrecursive methods into mathe-
matics. In: The L. E. J. Brouwer Centenary Symposium (Noordwijkerhout, 1981).
Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 110, pp. 319–335. North-
Holland, Amsterdam (1982). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-237X(09)70135-1
30. Ospichev, S.S.: Friedberg numberings in the Ershov hierarchy. Algebra Log. 54(4),
283–295 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10469-015-9349-2
31. Podzorov, S.Y.: Arithmetical D-degrees. Sib. Math. J. 49(6), 1109–1123 (2008).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11202-008-0107-8
32. Pour-El, M.B.: Gödel numberings versus Friedberg numberings. Proc. Am. Math.
Soc. 15(2), 252–256 (1964). https://doi.org/10.2307/2034045
33. Rogers, H.: Gödel numberings of partial recursive functions. J. Symb. Log. 23(3),
331–341 (1958). https://doi.org/10.2307/2964292
34. Selivanov, V.L.: Two theorems on computable numberings. Algebra Log. 15(4),
297–306 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01875946
35. Uspenskii, V.A.: Systems of denumerable sets and their enumeration. Dokl. Akad.
Nauk SSSR 105, 1155–1158 (1958). (in Russian)
Partial Sums on the Ultra-Wide
Word RAM
Philip Bille(B) , Inge Li Gørtz , and Frederik Rye Skjoldjensen
DTU Compute, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark

{phbi,inge}@dtu.dk
Abstract. We consider the classic partial sums problem on the ultra-

wide word RAM model of computation. This model extends the clas-
sic w-bit word RAM model with special ultrawords of length w2 bits
that support standard arithmetic and boolean operation and scattered
memory access operations that can access w (non-contiguous) locations
in memory. The ultra-wide word RAM model captures (and idealizes)
modern vector processor architectures.
Our main result is a new in-place data structure for the partial sum
problem that only stores a constant number of ultrawords in addition
to the input and supports operations in doubly logarithmic time. This
matches the best known time bounds for the problem (among polyno-
mial space data structures) while improving the space from superlinear
to a constant number of ultrawords. Our results are based on a simple
and elegant in-place word RAM data structure, known as the Fenwick
tree. Our main technical contribution is a new efficient parallel ultra-
wide word RAM implementation of the Fenwick tree, which is likely of
independent interest.
Keywords: Ultra-wide word RAM model · Partial sums · Fenwick tree
1 Introduction
Let A[1, . . . , n] be an array of integers of length n. The partial sums problem is
to maintain a data structure for A under the following operations:
i
– sum(i): return k=1 A[k].
– update(i, Δ): set A[i] ← A[i] + Δ.
The partial sums problem is a classic and well-studied data structure prob-
lem [1–4,9,12,14,16–19,21–24,31,32,38]. Partial sums is a natural range query
problem with applications in areas such as list indexing and dynamic rank-
ing [12], dynamic arrays [3,32], and arithmetic coding [14,34]. From a lower
bound perspective, the problem has been central in the development of new
techniques for proving lower bounds [29]. In classic models of computation the
complexity of the partial sums problem is well-understood with tight logarithmic
upper and lower bounds on the operations [31]. Hence, a natural question is if
c Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
J. Chen et al. (Eds.): TAMC 2020, LNCS 12337, pp. 13–24, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59267-7_2
14 P. Bille et al.
practical models of computation capturing modern hardware advances will allow

us the overcome the logarithmic barrier.
One such model is the RAM with byte overlap (RAMBO) model of com-
putation [6,7,17]. The RAMBO model extends the standard w-bit word RAM
model [20] with special words where individual bits are shared among other
words, i.e., changing a bit in a word will also change the bit in the words that
share that bit. The precise model depends on the layout of shared bits. This
memory architecture is feasible to design in hardware and prototypes have been
built [27]. In the RAMBO model Brodnik et al. [8] gave a time-space trade-off
τ
for partial sums that uses O(nw/2 + n) space and supports operations in O(τ )
time and for a parameter τ , 1 ≤ τ ≤ log log n. Here, the n term in the space
bound is for the special words with shared bits (organized in a tree layout) and
τ
the O(nw/2 ) term is for standard words. Plugging in constant τ , this gives an
w
O(n +n) space and constant time solution, for any > 0. At the other extreme,
with τ = log log n, this gives an O(n) space and O(log log n) time solution.
More recently, Farzan et al. [13] introduced the ultra-wide word RAM
(UWRAM) model of computation. The UWRAM model also extends the word
RAM model, but with special ultrawords of length w2 bits. The model sup-
ports standard arithmetic and boolean operations on ultrawords and scattered
memory access operations that access w locations in memory specified by an
ultraword in parallel. The UWRAM captures modern vector processor architec-
tures [11,28,33,36]. We present the details of the UWRAM model in Sect. 2.
Farzan et al. [13] showed how to simulate algorithms on RAMBO model on the
UWRAM model at the cost of slightly increasing space. Simulating the above
solution for partial sums they gave a time-space trade-off for partial sums that
τ
uses O(nw/2 + nw log n) space and supports operations in O(τ ) time and for a
parameter τ , 1 ≤ τ ≤ log log n. For constant τ , this is O(nw + nw log n) space
and constant time, for any > 0, and for τ = log log n this is O(nw log log n)
space and O(log log n) time.
1.1 Setup and Results
We revisit the partial sums problem on the UWRAM and present a simple new
algorithm that significantly improves the space overhead of the previous solu-
tions. Let A be an array of n w-bit integers. An in-place data structure for the
partial sums problem is a data structure that modifies the input array A, e.g.,
by replacing some of the entries in A, to efficiently support operations. In addi-
tion to the modified array the data structure is only allowed to store O(1) of
ultrawords. This definition extends the standard in-place/implicit data struc-
ture concept [10,15,30,35,37] to the UWRAM, by allowing a constant number
of ultrawords to be stored instead of (standard) words. Clearly, without this
modification computation on ultrawords is impossible. As in Farzan et al. [13]
we distinguish between the restricted UWRAM that supports a minimal set of
instructions on ultrawords consisting of addition, subtraction, shifts, and bitwise
boolean operations and the multiplication UWRAM that extends the instruction
Partial Sums on the Ultra-Wide Word RAM 15
set of the restricted UWRAM with a multiplication operation on ultrawords. We

show the following main result:
Theorem 1. Given an array A of n w-bit integers, we can construct in-place

partial sums data structures for A that support sum and update operations in
O(log log n) time on a restricted UWRAM.
Compared to the previous result, Theorem 1 matches the O(log log n) time bound
of Farzan et al. [13] (with parameter τ = Θ(log log n) while improving the space
overhead from O(nw log n) to a constant number of ultrawords. This is important
in practical applications since modern vector processors have a very limited
number of ultrawords available.
Technically, our solution is based on a simple and elegant in-place word RAM
data structure, called the Fenwick tree (see Sect. 3 for a detailed description).
The Fenwick tree support operations in O(log n) by sequentially traversing an
implicit tree structure. We show how to efficiently compute the access pattern on
the tree structure in parallel using prefix sum computations on ultrawords. Then,
given the locations to access we use scattered memory operations to access them
all in parallel. In total, this leads to the exponential improvement of Fenwick
trees. The main bottleneck in our algorithm is the prefix sum computation.
Interestingly, if we allow multiplication we can compute prefix sums in constant
time leading to the following Corollary for the multiplication UWRAM:
Corollary 1. Given an array A of n w-bit integers, we can construct in-place

partial sums data structures for A that support sum and update operations in
constant time on a multiplication UWRAM.
Multiplication (or prefix sum computation) is not an AC0 operation (it cannot
be implemented by a constant depth, polynomial size circuit) and therefore likely
not practical to implement on ultraword. However, Corollary 1 shows that we
can achieve significant improvements on the UWRAM with special operations.
Since UWRAM capture modern processors, we believe it is worth investigating
further, and that our work is a first step in this direction.
1.2 Outline
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2 and 3 we review the UWRAM

model of computation and the Fenwick tree. In Sect. 4 we present our UWRAM
implementation of the Fenwick tree. Finally, in Sect. 4.4 we discuss extensions of
the result and open problems.
2 The Ultra-Wide Word RAM Model

The word RAM model of computation [20] consists of an infinite memory of
w-bit words and an instruction set of arithmetic, boolean, and memory access
instructions such as the ones available in standard programming languages such
16 P. Bille et al.
w
Xw − 1 X2 X1 X0
w2
Fig. 1. The layout of an ultraword of w2 divided into w words each of w bits. The
leftmost bit of each word is reserved to be a test bit.
as C. We assume that we can store a pointer into the input in a single word and
hence w ≥ log n, where n is the size of the input. The time complexity of a word
RAM algorithm is the number of instructions and the space complexity is the
number of words used by the algorithm.
The ultra-wide word RAM (UWRAM) model of computation [13] extends the
word RAM model with special ultrawords of w2 bits. We distinguish between the
restricted UWRAM that supports a minimal set of instructions on ultrawords
consisting of addition, subtraction, shifts, and bitwise boolean operations and
the multiplication UWRAM that additionally supports multiplication. The time
complexity is the number of instruction (on standard words or ultrawords) and
the space complexity is the number of (standard) words used by the algorithm.
The restricted UWRAM captures modern vector processor architectures [11,28,
33,36]. For instance, the Intel AVX-512 vector extension [33] support similar
operations on 512-bit wide words (i.e., a factor of 8 compared to 642 = 4096).
2.1 Word-Level Parallelism
Due to their similarities, we can adopt many word-level parallelism techniques

from the word RAM to the UWRAM. We briefly review the key primitives and
techniques that we will use.
Let X be an ultraword of w2 bits. We often view X as divided into w words
of w consecutive bits each. See Fig. 1. We number the words in X from right-
to-left starting from 0 and use the notation Xj to denote the jth word in X.
Similarly, the bits of each word Xj are numbered from right-to-left starting
from 0. If only the rightmost ≤ w words in X are non-zero, we say that X
has length . For simplicity in the presentation, we reserve the leftmost bit of
each word to be a test bit for word-level parallelism operations. One may always
remove this assumption at no asymptotic cost, e.g., by using two words in an
ultraword to simulate each single word.
We now show how to implement common operations on ultrawords that we
will use later. Most of these are already available in hardware on modern vector
processor architectures. Componentwise arithmetic and bitwise operation are
straightforward to implement using standard word-level parallelism techniques
from the word RAM. For instance, given ultrawords X and Y , we can compute
the componentwise addition, i.e., the ultraword Z such that Zj = Xj + Y j
for j = 0, . . . , w − 1 by adding X and Y and & ’ing with the mask (01w−1 )w to
Partial Sums on the Ultra-Wide Word RAM 17
clear any test bits (we use exponentiation to denote bit repetition, i.e., 03 1 =
0001). We can also compare X and Y componentwise by |’ing in the test bits of
X, subtracting Y , and masking out the test bits by &’ing with (10w−1 )w . The jth
test bit of the result contains a 1 iff Xj ≥ Y j. Given X and another ultraword
T containing only test bits, we can extract the words in X according to the test
bits, i.e., the ultraword E such that Ej = Xj if the jth test bit of T is 1 and
Ej = 0 otherwise. To do so we copy the test bits by a subtracting (0w−1 1)w
from T and &’ing the result with X. All of the above mentioned operation take
constant time on a restricted UWRAM. Given an ultraword X of length , the
prefix sum of X is the ultraword P of length , such that P j = k≤j Xk.
We assume here that the integers computed in the prefix sum never exceed the
maximum size available in a word such that P j is always well-defined. We need
the following result.
Lemma 1. Given an ultraword X of length we can compute the prefix sum of

X in O(log ) time on a restricted UWRAM and in O(1) time on a multiplication
UWRAM.
Proof. First consider the restricted UWRAM. We implement a standard parallel

prefix-sum algorithm [25] (see also the survey by Blelloch [5]). For simplicity, we
assume that is a power of two. The algorithm consists of two phases that
conceptually construct and traverse a perfectly balanced binary tree T of height
log whose leaves are the words of X.
Given an internal node v in T , let vleft and vright denote the left and right
child of v, respectively. The first phase performs a bottom-up traversal of T and
computes for each node v an integer b(v). If v is a leaf, b(v) is the corresponding
integer in X and if v is an internal node b(v) = b(vleft ) + b(vright ). The second
phase performs a top-down traversal of T and computes an integer t(v). If v
is the root then t(v) = 0 and if v is an internal node then t(vleft ) = t(v) and
t(vright ) = t(vleft ) + b(vright ). After the second phase the integers at the leaves is
the prefix sum shifted by a single element and missing the last element. We shift
and add the last element to produce the final prefix sum. Since T is perfectly
balanced we can implement each level of a phase in constant time using shifting
and addition. The final shift and addition of the last element takes constant
time. It follow that the total time is O(log ). During the computation we only
need to maintain all of the values in a constant number of ultrawords.
Next consider the multiplication instruction set. We can then simply multiply
X with the constant (0w−1 1)w and mask out the rightmost words of the result
to produce the prefix sum. See Hagerup [20] for a detailed description of why
this is correct. In total this uses O(1) time.
2.2 Memory Access
The UWRAM supports standard memory access operation to read or write a sin-
gle word or a sequence of w contiguous words. More interestingly, the UWRAM
also supports scattered access operations that access w memory locations (not
18 P. Bille et al.
necessarily contiguous) in parallel. Given an ultraword A containing w memory

addresses, a scattered read loads the contents of the addresses into an ultraword
X, such that Xj contains the contents of memory location Aj. Given two
ultrawords A and X scattered write sets the contents memory location Aj to
be Xj. Scattered memory accesses captures the memory model used by IBM’s
Cell architecture [11]. Scattered memory access operations were also proposed
by Larsen and Pagh [26] in the context of the I/O model of computation.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
A 1 2 1 1 0 2 3 1 0 1 3 4 1 1 1 2
F 1 3 1 5 0 2 3 11 0 1 3 8 1 2 1 24
Fig. 2. A array A and the Fenwick tree F . The lines above F indicate the partial
sum of A stored at the rightmost endpoint of the line. For instance, the F [12] =
A[9] + A[10] + A[11] + A[12] = 0 + 1 + 3 + 4 = 8.
3 Fenwick Trees
Let A be an array of n w-bit integers and assume for simplicity that n is a power
of two. The Fenwick tree [14,34] is an in-place data structure that replaces the
array A as follows. If n = 1, then leave A unchanged. Otherwise, replace all
values at even entries A[2i] by the sum A[2i − 1] + A[2i]. Then, recurse on the
subarray A[2, 4, . . . , n]. The resulting array F stores a subset of the partial sums
of A organized in a tree layout (see Fig. 1).
To answer sum(i) query, we compute a sequence of indices in F and add
the values in F at these indices together. Let rmb(x) denote the position of
the rightmost bit in an integer sx. Define the sum sequence is1 , . . . , isr given by
is1 = i and isj = isj−1 − 2rmb(ij−1 ) , for j = 2, . . . , r. The final element isr is
0. We compute and return F [is1 ] + F [is2 ] + · · · + F [isr−1 ]. For instance, for i =
13 = (1101)2 the sum sequence is 13, 12, 8, 0 = (1101)2 , (1100)2 , (1000)2 , (0000)2 .
Hence, sum(13) = F [13] + F [12] + F [8] = 1 + 8 + 11 = 20 = A[1] + · · · + A[13]. We
access at most O(log n) entries in F and hence the total time for sum is O(log n).
Note that we can always recover the original array A using the sum operation,
since A[i] = sum(i) − sum(i − 1).
To compute update(i, Δ), we compute a sequence of indices in F and add Δ
to the values in F at each of these indices. Define the update sequence iu1 , . . . , iut
u u u rmb(iu
given by i1 = i and ij = ij−1 + 2 j−1 )
, for j = 2, . . . , t. The final element iut
is 2n. We set F [i1 ] = F [i1 ] + Δ, . . . , F [it ] = F [iut−1 ] + Δ. For instance, for i = 13
u u u
the update sequence is 13, 14, 16, 32. Hence, update(13, 5) adds 5 to F [13], F [14],
and F [16]. Similar to the sum operation, the total running time for update is
O(log n).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Rohkiammaksi ruveta,
Likemmäksi liittäytä.
184—193.
Mari aina estelepi,
Sanopi sanalla tällä:
"Enkä huoli ensinkänä
Tulla kanssasi tutuksi,
Kun et laita laaullensa,
Anna kihlat kukkorosta,
Kultasormukset kuleta,
Kääri ketjut kaulahani,
Siitä tulisin tutuksi,
Likemmäksi liittähyisin."
194—206.
Riitta varsin valvovainen
Yrkön kanssa kaunihisti,
Kuultuansa kuihkutuksen,
Alko äystätä isosti.
Haukku Riitta Haapalaista,
Sanoen sanalla tällä:
"Sinä olet sika Siikajoelta,
Kehno Kestilän kylästä,
Mont' on mennyt mennävuonna,
Wiety viimmessä kesänä,
Parempata paiskattuna,
Saatettu sotaväkehen,
Etelähän ennätetty."
207—211.
Alko ajoa pihalle,
Takaperin tanhualle,
Wielä kiitti vierestänsä
Totiseksi toista miestä,
Hyvin Yrkköä ylisti.
212—228.
Samu nousi näppärästi,
Saapi lakkinsa samassa,
Kintahat ja kenkänsäki.
Lähti ulos juoksemahan,
Waan ei osannut ovehen,
Lankiapi lattialle.
Pelko paino pitkäksensä,
Pää se paukahti kivehen,
Sormet poikki portahasen,
Lakki lenti lietehesen,
Toinen kinnas kiukahalle,
Toinen sattu salvamehen,
Kengät keskelle lakia.
Ei malta häässä maata,

Kauan olla oikiana,
Yli kynnyksen kytäsi
Takaperin tanhualle.
229—238.
Mari nousi nopiasti,
Ite pistäysi pihalle,
Otti kiini olkapäästä,
Pani kaulahan kätensä,
Lausu aivan lempehesti:
"Elä kulta kumminkana
Pane mieltäsi pahaksi
Noista töistä tuhmimmista,
Mielettömistä menoista;
Tule vielä toinen kerta!"
239—243.
Waan ei tohtinut takasin
Poika siirtyä sisälle,
Meni siitä matkohinsa,
Itku silmiä sitopi,
Weet poskille putosi.
244—256.
Mari se sisälle saapi,
Pani maata paikallensa,
Siallensa siirtäyty.
Sitte nurku nukkumatta
Riitta rukan rintavuutta,
Suupalton pauhinata:
"Kun et vaivanen varonut,
Ajot pois pojan parahan,
Minun heitit Hekkalahan,
Yrjänän ite piätit;
Minun aikani asunto,
Päivät pitkäksi tulevat,
Itkun tuottapi ikävä."
257—271.
Kesän oli kekkiänä;
Tuli sitte talven tullen,
Lähti Launolan kylältä,
Astu Antti Anttoselta,
Taitava talon isäntä.
Waunut vyöryvät kujalla,
Kiesit kiersi kartanolla,
Helisi hevosen kello,
Kovin kuulu kulkusetki,
Sulhanen oli ohjilla,
Mies on kaunis kahtannolta,
Pulskia punamerinen,
Waattchet komin koriat',
Napit kullan kiiltämäisct,
Hopiasta hohtavaisct.
272—276.
Mari luulepi lujasti,
Ett' on vieras Wiipurisla,
Saanut Saksan kaupungista,
Eli tullut Lukhulmista,
Nuohtin poika rohkiampi.
277—280.
Anna astupi tupahan,
Eellä ennätti sanoa:
"Ota oikia osasi,
Taitava talon isäntä!"
281—286.
Mari vielä muistelepi:
"Mun on haiku Haapalaista,
Jonk' on sormus sormessani,
Jonka kanssa kaiken talven
Aina valvoin valpahasti
Öillä yksillä olilla."
287—302.
Anna haukku Haapalaista,
Kieli kerkiä panepi:
"Totteletko toljaketta,
Höyhenkengän höynäystä!
Elä huoli huitarista,
Kovin konnankoukkusesta,
Jok' on ruma ruumihilta,
Partaki pahannäkönen,
Eik' ole mieltä muille asti,
Eikä ihtessä piteä.
Laaustaan on aivan laiska,
Syöpi ruoan runsahimman,
Juopi viinan kun vetenä
Ihmisiltä ilkiästi,
Aina pirtissä asupi,
Pötköttäpi pöyän päässä."
303—314.
Toista kiitti kielevästi:
"Ollut nuorena nopia,
Wiel' on virkku vanhanaki,
Kaunis kaikissa tiloissa,
Talon töihin taitavampi:
Kaikki kyllä kaunihisti
Laittelepi laaullensa,
Aina akkainki asiat.
Nametass' on naisten luona,
Leivät leipopi leviät,
Pa'at kaikki kahtelepi,
Kaikki kulkepi koatki.
315—348.
Täll' on sini silmäripset,
Tällä kulta kulmakarvat,
Tällä vaattehet verasta,
Jotka näyttävät näkyvän.
319—322.
Täll'on kihlat kirkkahimmat,
Kultasormukset soriat,
Jotka ennen aikonansa
Osti Oulun kaupungista."
323—328.
Anna kukkaron avasi,
Otti lantit lakkarista,
Jotka työnti tyttärelle.
Hyvin helisi hopiat,
Kultasormukset kulisi,
Kahlisivat kahmaloissa.
329—331.
Kohta annettiin asia,
Saatettiin sana kylälle,
Julki kaiken kirkkokunnan.
332—355.
Sinä päivänä samana
Tuli sanoma Samulle,
Ett' on Mari morsianna.
Säikähti Sameli riepu,
Weri ohtahan osasi,
Niinkun pilvi päivän päälle.
Sylkäytti syänaloa,
Wärähytti varpahia,
Tahto puheta punanen,
Waikk' oli valkiaverinen.
Eikä sitte ensiyönä
Saanut unta silmillensä,
Ajatteli aikojansa:
"Mikä mielessä Marilla,
Kun ei huolinut minusta,
Waikka kaiken vaivan kanssa
Kannan kalua kokohon!
Minä otan ompelolla,
Takomalla talvikauet,
Weän värkkiä kokohan,
Wielä viljoa metästä,
Ansoistani aikalailla,
Parahite pauloistani,
Satimistani samate."
356—368.
Aina arveli Sameli,
Wielä muisti muinosetki:
"Sinne sortu sormukseni,
Sinne värkkini väheni,
Kaikki kulu kintahani,
Kaikki kenkäni keveni,
Yöjalassa juostessani,
Warsin kauan valvomassa,
Talvikauen tarpoessa.
Sauoin varsin vaikiasti,
Sukset tarttu takkalahan,
Tahon puota pyörtehesen,
Aina mennä ämmän alle."
369—378.
Sitte ensilauantaina
Lähti poika polkemahan,
Walmisti vaeltamahan,
Kylyn jälkehen kylästä.
Juoksi yöllä yksinänsä
Heti kohta Hekkalahan,
Waan ei löytänyt Maria,
Eikä saanut sormustansa —
Mari oli poissa Pulkkilasta
Mennyt morsianverolle.
379—381.
Hakaroipi Haapalaista,
Kulkkuperä kuivettupi,
Pakottaa pahon syäntä.
382-389.
Sitte kuuli korkialta
Saarnastuolista sanoman,
Marin vietävän vihille,
Iän kaiken istumahan,
Asumahan Antin kanssa.
Ain' on haiku Haapalaisen,
Aina yölläki unissa,
Aina päässä päivänäki.
390—393.
Kauan häitä hankittihin,
Monet viikot morsianta,
Suuri aika sulhasmiestä.
Mari sano sulhaselle:
"Joko viimmen joutunemma,
Joko lyönemmä lähöksi;
Toisinaan tulepi konna,
Pylyhousu pöyän päähän,
Isotellen ilkiästi,
Humalaisna hullupäanä,
Tuopi pian tullessansa
Wielä villin viimmesenki,
Kun on ollut ensimmäisnä,
Waan ei virkata mitänä."
404—411.
Wiimmen vietihin vihille,
Päästettihin perjantaina.
Kaikki kulki kahtomahan
Kauan häitä hankituita,
Monen miehen morsianta,
Kuulusinta kukkapäätä,
Suurta riemua suloista,
Suurta viulun vingutusta.
412—116.
Waan ei pojat puoletkana
Mahu salihin sisälle,
Eikä pääse pyörimähän;
Kansa seiso kartanolla,
Alla akkunan pihalla.
417—423.
Annettihin akkunasta
Wiinaryppy vierahille,
Punssikuppi kuhtutuille;
Kaikki tuli tuppurihin,
Nurkkavilpat viimmeseksi,
Että tahtomat tapella
Rannin pojat rantehella.
424—431.
Martti neuo neitosia,
Tykö puhu tyttärille,
Olla loukossa lujassa,
Ett' on kuja kuhtutuilla,
Sola sievästi rakettu.
Kahto sitte kartanolle,
Täällä pojat pyörimässä,
Tanteretta taistelevat.
432—439.
Martti puhu poikasille,
Kovin könnistö köpisi:
"Ettekö luule ensinkänä
Tulevan tilintekoa,
Kun ette siirry sinnemmäksi
Kokonansa kartanosta,
Että pääsisi pihalla
Kuhtuväki kulkemahan."
440—448.
Pojat nakkasit napahan,
Lumipallon palliohon,
Muutamat ne muistelivat
Naurusanoilla Samua:
"Ei ole sattunut Sameli,
Kahtomahan Karjalainen,
Kenpä saattaisi sanoman,
Kulettaisi Köyryojahan;
Siell' on ollut ompelossa."
449—460.
Kulkupoika kuuliainen,
Aivan joutusa jalalta,
Saattapi sanan kylälle,
Kulettapi Köyryojahan:
"Astu heti Anttosehen,
Lähe Launolan kylähän!
Siell' on monta muualtaki,
Sinne on Siikajoelta,
Tullut paljo Paltamosta,
Oulujoelta osannut,
Kyttäriä Tyrnävältä,
Haapajoelta halulla."
461-464.
Taasen säikähti Sameli,
Muoto muualle menepi,
Rupiapi ruskiaksi,
Ohtavierus ouostupi.
465-469.
Pojat penkiltä puhuvat,
Naiset kaikki karsinasta:
"Mik' on tullunna tulonen,
Kosk' ei puhu puolinkana,
Waikk' oli illalla ilonen!"
470—479.
Ajo kyytillä kylähän,
Aina asti Anttoselle.
Sitte kahto kartanolta,
Pian pirtin ikkunasta:
Mari istupi isona,
Pöykkiänä pöyän päässä,
Pää on pantu palmikolla,
Kulta kaulassa kaluna,
Kuultaruunuki rakettu,
Korvat kullankarvaseksi.
480—492.
Puhu vielä Wiion Yrkkö
Muistutteli muien kuulten:
"Onko hyvä Haapalaista,
Kahtoasi kartanolta,
Kun on saanut semmoseksi,
Mieli mennynnä pahaksi,

Saanut suuki surkiaksi,
Huuli venynyt veneeksi,
Toinen puoli puohtimeksi,
Wesi silmistä sirupi,
Nenä räsä riesuapi,
Niinkun hete Heinäkuussa,
Lähe lämminnä kesänä."
493—502.
Mari kiljasi kivasti:
"Se parahaksi pahalle,
Keskitieksi kehnommalle;
Enkä huoli höyhöstäsi,
Weinaristasi valita,
"Joll' on monta morsianta,
Saattapi satoja olla,
Ellijä enimmät puolet,
Annijaki aikalailla,
Wielä Liisoja lisäksi.
503—506.
Kerran kävi Hekkalassa,
Kulki konna koukkuinensa,
Taisi sillonki takasi
Kyllä kyytillä palata."
507-511.
Niinpä Mari mahtavasti
Kyllä haukku Haapalaista,
Kun ei oikein osannut
Puhutella Pulkkilassa,
Riitan kanssa rinnustella.
512—517.
Wielä naiset naurelivat,
Paljo piiat pilkkasivat:
"Mene syömähän Sameli,
Poika riepu pöyän päähän,
Kun olet selvennyt surusta."
518—526.
Sanopi Sameli riepu:
"Jos oisi köyttä joutavaista,
Jonka sitoisin simuhin,
Solmiaisin suolilleni,
Ettei nälkä näissä häissä
Panisi nyt näin pahasti;
Kun en muistanut kylässä
Syöä iltaista esinnä,
Enkä ottanut evästä.
527—538.
Pääsisin mä piilosalla,
Käyä uunilla osaisin,
Saisin ma pa'asta paistin,
Kupin uunin kukkulalta,
Warkahin vetäisin poies,
Kulettaisin kartanolle
Siinä söisin sormillani,
Kourillani koitteleisin,
Mitä pannussa parasta,
Kosk' ei kanssa kahvelia,
Eikä luona lusikkata,
Pöytäveistä vieressäni."
539—550.
Sitte Wielä viikon päässä
Saneli Sameli riepu,
Ite laulo Launolassa:
"Oisin ottanut emännän,
Kumppalikseni komian,
Warsin sievän vaimokseni
Jok' ois neuonut nevalle,
Talon töihin taivutellut,
Toimitellut tervateille,
Poies vienyt viinateiltä;
Waan jo veivät viekkahammat,
Etevämmät ennättivät.
551—559.
Jo on souttu suoveteni,
Kalalampini kaluttu,
Walkamani vilkutettu.
Jo on souttu — soutakohot —
Selv' on souta souttu ranta,
Ennen tehty tie parempi.
Jo on souttu — soutakohot —
Soleamp' on soutakseni,
Kepeämpi käätäkseni."
Jälkimaine. Näistä runoista, jotka ehkä lukianki mielestä lienevät

somaluontosija, lauletaan edellistä laajalta Wenäjän Karjalassa.
Laatuansa on se vanhanaikuisia. Jälkimmäinen on Pulkkilan
kappelista Siikajoen pitäjätä. En tiedä, vieläkö sitä nykyjäänki siellä
muisteltanee, sillä se on minulle kirjotettuna tullut. Sen vaan tiedän,
että se somuutensa puolesta ei ansaitse heti unhotuksiin tulla. Ilman
kenenkän ymmärtämäisen mieltä pahottamatta kuvailee se asioita,
miten ne luonnollisesti tapahtuivatki. Sanoin muka ymmärtäväisen,
sillä niitäki löytyy, jotka millon mistä, kullon kusta, ilman aikojaan
saavat mielensä pahaksi. Mitä oikiassa kelpo naururunossa
oppineiltaki vaaditaan, runoilijan ei itsiänsäkän säästävän, sen asian
on nykysen runon laatia, "pölyhousu Haapalainen" taikka "Sameli
riepu", kuni hän toisessa paikassa nimitäksen, aika hyvästi omin
järkinensä älynnyt. Ei kestään toisesta puhu hän senlaisilla moitinta-
ja pilkkasanoilla, kun itsestänsä v. 200—206, 219—228, 289—302,
396—403, 484—511. Hekkalan Mariasta, johon runo erittäin koskee,
ei lausuta pahempata, ettei kyllä valitettavasti monestaki tytöstä käy
pahempia lauseita. Melkein lukisin koko runon hälle kunniaksi, koska
siinä ei ole voitu hänen arvoansa suuresti millään alentaa, sillä
epäilemättä, jos vaan muuten olisi mitä pahaa hänestä tietty, ei olisi
sitä mainimatta heitetty. Ja panisin vaikka veikan, hänen, jos vieläki
eläisi, ei suuttuvan, jos konsa runo eissä laulettaisi. Paljo ei puutu,
ettei tämä runo sopisi varsin osotteeksi eli näytteeksi, miten
laadullinen naururuno muiltaki kansan runoilloilta olisi toimitettava.
Sihen vaatisimma ennen muita, ei ketään senlaisilla sanoilla
naureltavaksi, että siitä hänen nimensä, armonsa ja kunniansa
tulisivat turmelluksi, jota vaston emme luule haittaavan, jos
pienempiä naurunaineita lystillisesti kuvaillaan ja kerroillaan, ei
sopimattomilla, riettasilla, sanoilla, vaan somilla, siisteillä, lausumilla.
Sen suatsemma itsestämme, sen teemmä toiselle vanhan
sanalaskun mukaan, joka kuuluu: minä muita, muut minua, palkatta
panettelevat. Wielä paremmin luonnistuu senlaisissa runoelmissa, ei
ketä erittäin nimittää, vaan ilman kehnoille tavoille ja huonoille
käytöksille naurella. Senlaista naurelmata osottaa sanalasku: puhu
miestä päiväkausi, ellös nimeä nimitä.
Warsinko tarvinneekan tämä runo erityisiä selvityksiä; koen

kuitenki panna muutamia:
v. 5—9. Yli koko Suomen maan on pojilla tapana, kesäsinä öinä

juoksennella tyttöjä tervehtimässa (juosta yöjalassa, kulkea
yökengässä). Näillä juoksuilla useinki ei tarkoteta mitään erittäin
siistitöntä elämätä, vaan enemmin tilasuutta saada poikain
tyttösensä, sulhojen morsiantensa kanssa keskinäisistä asioistansa
tuumailla. Monastiki sattu näillä matkoilla kaikenlaisia syrjätapauksia,
joita sitte jälkeen laulellaan eli ilman naurellaan. Miten Sameli rievun
yöjalassansa kävi, kertoo runo m. 116—243.
v. 12—14 ja 319—328. Luettelee muutamia tavallisimmia

kihlavärkkilöitä. Niin antaaki näillä seuduin tahi toista myöten
lähettää poika tytöllensä kulta- eli hopiasormuksia kaksin kolmin,
samate huiviloita ja viisin kuusin eli usiampiaki hopiarahoja (kovia
riksilöitä). Kun toisinaan kihloja vielä jollai vaate'kcrrallaki lisätään,
niin nousevat nämät lahjat välistä sadan ja kahdenki sadan rupilan
verosiksi. Tyttö sulhoon mieltyvä ottaa ne vastaan, muuten työntää
jällen. Wastaan otettua kihlat lähtee sulho morsiamen kotiin
ruokaverolle. Siksi vedättää hän sinne toisinaan kahdella, kolmellaki,
hevosella ruokavärkkiä ja syöttää heimon, jolle sitä varten erityiset
kutsut laitetaan. Kihlattuna lähtee tavallisesti muutamaksi viikoksi
morsian sulhonsa kotiin, jota sanotaan mennä olemaan eli,
epäsomasemmalla sanalla, mennä housuviikoille. Tätä aikaa käyttää
hän valmistellaksensa kaikenlaisia antimia, kintaita, sukkia, vöitä,
lakkiloita, paitoja ja muita vaatteita, häiden aikana heimolle ja paikoin
itsekullenki kutsuvieraalle lahjoteltavaksi, jotta kyllä sopiiki häneen
toinen puoli sanalaskusta: työstä työhön morsianta, unesta unehen
lasta. Paitsi näitä häävalmistelmia tulee hän tällä ajalla mastasen
elinpaikkansa ja aivotun miehensä mielenlaadun paremmin
tuntemaan. He makaavatki nyt yksillä oljilla, vaan kumpanenki
puettuna, josta lieneeki tälle ajalle jälkimmäinen nimensä tullut.
Wälistä, ehkä hyvin harvon, luopuu tämän olemisen jälkeen toisien
taikka toinen puoli kihlaliitostansa. Jos morsian purkaa, tulee hänen
saadut kihlansa takasiantaa ja monasti ruokaverokulutki sulholle
palkita. Sulhasen purkaessa pitää tavallisesti morsian hyvänänsä,
minkä kerran on saanut.
v. 23—26. Siikajoki on toinen pitäjäs Oulusta etelään päin

kulkevilla. Ilman Pulkkilata on sillä 4 muuta kappelia, Revonlahti,
Paavola, Frantsila ja Piippola. Hekkalan taloon luetaan kirkolta noin
4 virstaa [Wirstoilla tästäkilähin aina ymmärrämmä Wenäjän virstoja
eli 10:nettä osaa penikulmasta. Ruotsin virstoja sitä vaston
nimitämmä neljännykseksi.] ja yhtä suuntaa Wiionaholle eli Wiiolle
(v. 105) ei täyttä kahta mirstaa. Molemmat ovat ne niin erittäin
kutsuttua Pulkkilan kylää, vaan Anttosen talo (v. 260) on Launolan
kylää, 5:den virstan päässä toiselle suunnalle kirkolta. Kestilä (v. 78)
on viimmenen kestikimaripaikka Pulkkilata Säräsniemen kirkolle
Paltamon pitäjätä mennessä.
v. 173. Mistähän meikäläisetki tiennevät aasilla pitkät korvat

olevan?
v. 277. Anna oli eräs vanhempi vaimopuoli puhe'miehen verosta
päältä tyttöä puhutteleva.
v. 305, 310—314, 321. Tämmöset kiitospuheet ei toki kaikitse

naistenkan silmissä kovin miestä ylennä. Koiruudellako lie runoiliaki
ne tässä tilassa Annan suuhun sovittanut?
v. 368. Ämmäksi ja paikon äiäksi ja enoksiki sanotaan

koskiputouksia.
v. 378. Morsiamet tavallisesti kayvät omasta ja toisinaan

vieraistaki likimmäisistä pitäjistä apua, saaden mitä mistäki, villoja,
pellavia, vaatetta, ruokavärkkiä, rahaa jne häitensä ja uuden
taloutensa hankkeeksi. Tälle kululle oli nyt Mari saanut (mennyt
morsian merolle).
v. 445. Millä verolla Haapalaista tässä Karjalaiseksi nimitetään, sit'

en tiedä. Pitäisikö olla'ki Haapalainen?
v. 447. Köyryojan kylään luetaan Anttosen talosta 15:ta virstan ja

kirkolta 2:den penikuorman paikoilla.
v. 456—460. Pitäjiin ja kappeliloita Pulkkilan kirkon ympärillä,

Paltamo ja sen kappeli Säräsniemi koilliseen päin, Haapajärvi
Pyhäjokea etelään, Siikajoen emäkirkko länteen, Tyrnävä Liminkata
luoteesen ja Oulujoki, jolla tavoteltanee Utajärven kappelia Muhosta,
pohjaseen. Onki maassa tavallinen ulkopitäjistäki käydä isoja häitä
katsomaan.
Satuja.
1. Paimen ja Ahti.
Paimen jokirannalla veistelevä pudotti veitsensä joteen. Kauan

vahinkoansa törmällä itkevän kuuli Ahti, ui luoksi, sukelti pohjaan ja
toi sieltä kultaveitsen paimenelle. "Ei se se ollut", sano paimen ja
Ahti toiste pohjaan upoten toi hopiaisen. Ei sitänä omistaen, toi Ahti
kolmannella kerralla oikian veitsen, jonka paimen ilolla omaksensa
tunnustit Ahti kiittäen paimenen rehellisyyttä anto hänelle kaikki
kolme veistä. Asia tuli pian toisille tutuksi. Niin ajatteli muutama
toinen paimen; "miksi ei minullenki voisi yhtä onnellisesti sattua?"
Meni jokiayräälle, nakkasi veitsensä jokeen ja rupesi vahinkoansa
itkemään. Ahti toi taasenki kultaveitsen joesta ja kysäsi: "tätäkö
itket?". "Aivan sitä," vastasi paimen ja vikasi kätensä veistä
tavottamaan. Waan Ahti ei suuresti tämän paimenen rehellisyyttä
kiittävä ui matkohinsa ja jätti hänen ilman omaaki jokeen
mielentaiten nakattua veistänsä.
Rehellisyys maan perii.
2. Hepo ja Härkä.
Härkä kiitti onnelliseksi hevoista, joka aina appeilla eläen sai

enimmät aikansa joutilasna olla. Hänen itse siitä vaston,
viheliäisimmän elävän kaikista, piti pureksella kuivia olkia ja joka
päivä raskaimmissa töissä olla. Niin tuli sota ja sinne sai hevonenki.
Waan sodasta takasi tuli hän vähissä hengissä, kolmella jalalla,
silmäpuolena ja muuten pahasti raadeltuna. Näin surkiassa tilassa
tapasi hänen härkäki ja sano: "siinäkö se hevosen onnellisuus oliki,

Theory and Applications of Models

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory and Applications of Models

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory and Applications of Models

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full download test bank at ebook textbookfull.

Theory and Applications of Models

Web and Internet Economics 16th International

e Learning e Education and Online Training 6th EAI

Information Systems Security 16th International

Natural Language Processing and Chinese Computing 9th

Services Computing SCC 2020 17th International

Cloud Computing CLOUD 2020 13th International

Edge Computing EDGE 2020 4th International Conference

Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision Third Chinese

Theory and Applications

Editorial Board Members

Theory and Applications

ISSN 0302-9743 ISSN 1611-3349 (electronic)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

The 16th Annual Conference on Theory and Applications of Models of Computation

May 2020 Jianer Chen

Abam, Mohammad Ali Loff, Bruno

Semilattices of Punctual Numberings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Partial Sums on the Ultra-Wide Word RAM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Securely Computing the n-Variable Equality Function with 2n Cards . . . . . . 25

Polynomial Kernels for Paw-Free Edge Modification Problems . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Floorplans with Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

A Primal-Dual Randomized Algorithm for the Online Weighted

Sumcheck-Based Delegation of Quantum Computing to Rational Server . . . . 69

Online Removable Knapsack Problems for Integer-Sized Items . . . . . . . . . . . 82

An Improved Approximation Algorithm for the Prize-Collecting

LP-Based Algorithms for Computing Maximum Vertex-Disjoint Paths

A Constant Factor Approximation for Lower-Bounded k-Median . . . . . . . . . 119

Reverse Mathematics, Projective Modules and Invertible Modules. . . . . . . . . 132

Two-Stage Submodular Maximization Problem Beyond Non-negative

Optimal Matroid Bases with Intersection Constraints: Valuated Matroids,

On the Complexity of Acyclic Modules in Automata Networks . . . . . . . . . . 168

Eternal Connected Vertex Cover Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Parametric Streaming Two-Stage Submodular Maximization. . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Approximation Guarantees for Deterministic Maximization of Submodular

A Novel Initialization Algorithm for Fuzzy C-means Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 215

On the Parameterized Complexity of d-Restricted Boolean Net Synthesis . . . . 226

Approximate #Knapsack Computations to Count Semi-fair Allocations . . . . . 239

Characterizations and Approximability of Hard Counting Classes

On Existence of Equilibrium Under Social Coalition Structures. . . . . . . . . . . 263

Space Complexity of Streaming Algorithms on Universal Quantum

On Coresets for Support Vector Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

Tractabilities for Tree Assembly Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

On Characterization of Petrie Partitionable Plane Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Disjunctive Propositional Logic and Scott Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

Dispersing and Grouping Points on Segments in the Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340

Synchronizing Words and Monoid Factorization: A Parameterized

Hidden Community Detection on Two-Layer Stochastic Models:

A Primal-Dual Algorithm for Euclidean k-Means Problem with Penalties . . . . 377

The Complexity of the Partition Coloring Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390

FPT Algorithms for Generalized Feedback Vertex Set Problems . . . . . . . . . . 402

Fixed-Order Book Thickness with Respect to the Vertex-Cover Number:

Acyclic Edge Coloring Conjecture Is True on Planar Graphs Without

On Pure Space vs Catalytic Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453

Nikolay Bazhenov1,2(B) , Manat Mustafa3 , and Sergei Ospichev1,2

Abstract. The theory of numberings studies uniform computations for

Keywords: Numbering · Upper semilattice · Rogers semilattice ·

Iν := {n ∈ ω : (∀i < n)(ν(i) = ν(n))}

The desired numbering is deﬁned as μ := ν ◦ h. It is not hard to establish that

(a) There is a (least) number we ≤ t such that we ≥ e, ν(we ) = ν(0), and we

Lemma 1. Given an ultraword X of length we can compute the preﬁx sum of