3

From wikipedia:

A problem H is NP-hard if and only if there is an NP-complete problem L that is polynomial time Turing-reducible to H (i.e., L ≤ TH).

Why does the problem(call it W) being reduced from need to be NP-complete? Why can't it just also be NP-hard? It seems like what you care about W being "hard" not that its in NP.

Thoughts?

CraigTeegarden
  • 8,173
  • 8
  • 38
  • 43
UnknownGuy
  • 213
  • 4
  • 9

2 Answers2

3

It can. In fact, your second paragraph implies the first paragraph.

Assume NP-hard problem H is polynomially reducible to problem X. By definition, there exists an NP-complete problem C that is polynomially reducible to H. Since both reductions are polynomial, you can reduce C to X in polynomial time. Therefore, NP-complete problem C is reducible to X in polynomial time. Therefore problem X is NP-hard.

Mehrdad Afshari
  • 414,610
  • 91
  • 852
  • 789
0

If you can polynomially reduce an NP-hard problem to your problem that's sufficient to prove NP-hardness of your problem. However, a specific NP-hard problem may not be polynomially reducible to your problem even though it is NP-hard itself.

Furthermore, you do not have to prove NP-hardness by reduction you can also prove it directly.

Peter G.
  • 14,786
  • 7
  • 57
  • 75