Overview
I’m puzzled by conflicting reduction definitions in complexity theory. One source implies that transforming one problem into another makes it simpler, while another asserts the opposite. Clarification is needed.
hey jackhero77, i thnk reduction is meant to show that if problem A reduces to B, A is no harder than B, even if sources jumble the terminology. context matters alot so check which version fits your case. hope this helps!
The ambiguity is often a result of the context in which reductions are defined. In my experience, the key point is that a reduction shows that one problem is at most as difficult as another by transforming it. This transformation does not make the problem simpler by itself but provides a comparative framework between problems. The confusion usually arises from terminology shift between making a problem “easier” to solve versus establishing a relative difficulty order. I suggest looking closely at the type of reduction being used and the computational model it assumes.