CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

PPP (complexity)

computational complexity class

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 21, 2026
Entity authorityQ7120193
Source-derived summary

In computational complexity theory, the complexity class PPP (polynomial pigeonhole principle) is a subclass of TFNP. It is the class of search problems that can be shown to be total by an application of the pigeonhole principle. Christos Papadimitriou introduced it in the same paper that introduced PPAD and PPA. PPP contains both PPAD and PWPP (polynomial weak pigeonhole principle) as subclasses. These complexity classes are of particular interest in cryptography because they are strongly related to cryptographic primitives such as one-way permutations and collision-resistant hash functions.

Definition

PPP is the set of all function computation problems that admit a polynomial-time reduction to the PIGEON problem, defined as follows:

Given a Boolean circuit

C

{\displaystyle C}

having the same number

n

{\displaystyle n}

of input bits as output bits, find either an input

x

{\displaystyle x}

that is mapped to the output

C

(

x

)

=

0

n

{\displaystyle C(x)=0^{n}}

, or two distinct inputs

x

y

{\displaystyle x\neq y}

that are mapped to the same output

C

(

x

)

=

C

(

y

)

{\displaystyle C(x)=C(y)}

.

A problem is PPP-complete if PIGEON is also polynomial-time reducible to it. Note that the pigeonhole principle guarantees that PIGEON is total. We can also define WEAK-PIGEON, for which the

weak pigeonhole principle guarantees totality. PWPP is the corresponding class of problems that are polynomial-time reducible to it. WEAK-PIGEON is the following problem:

Given a Boolean circuit

C

{\displaystyle C}

having

n

{\displaystyle n}

input bits and

n

1

{\displaystyle n-1}

output bits, find

x

y

{\displaystyle x\neq y}

such that

C

(

x

)

=

C

(

y

)

{\displaystyle C(x)=C(y)}

.

Here, the range of the circuit is strictly smaller than its domain, so the circuit is guaranteed to be non-injective.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “PPP (complexity)” as computational complexity class. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current 296-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where complexity, computational and class can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as computational complexity class. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7120193. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “PPP (complexity)”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow PPP (complexity) primary sources, PPP (complexity) archive and complexity research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “PPP (complexity)”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from PPP (complexity)” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.