Paper detail

Prefix and plain Kolmogorov complexity characterizations of 2-randomness: simple proofs

Joseph Miller [16] and independently Andre Nies, Frank Stephan and Sebastiaan Terwijn [18] gave a complexity characterization of 2-random sequences in terms of plain Kolmogorov complexity C: they are sequences that have infinitely many initial segments with O(1)-maximal plain complexity (among the strings of the same length). Later Miller [17] showed that prefix complexity K can also be used in a similar way: a sequence is 2-random if and only if it has infinitely many initial segments with O(1)-maximal prefix complexity (which is n + K (n) for strings of length n). The known proofs of these results are quite involved; in this paper we provide simple direct proofs for both of them. In [16] Miller also gave a quantitative version of the first result: the 0'-randomness deficiency of a sequence ω equals lim inf [n - C (ω1 . . . ωn)] + O(1). (Our simplified proof can also be used to prove this.) We show (and this seems to be a new result) that a similar quantitative result is also true for prefix complexity: 0'-randomness deficiency equals lim inf [n + K (n) -- K (ω1 . . . ωn)] + O(1).

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.