[#P3078] Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?

Randomized computation compared with deterministic simulation. — A structural automaton diagram of the statement's mathematical objects.

Problem. Is \(\mathrm{BPP}=\mathrm P\)? Equivalently, can every polynomial-time randomized algorithm with two-sided error at most \(1/3\) be simulated by a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm?

1Context

Known frontier: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Open boundary: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.

2Problem setup

Definition 1 (BPP). Languages decided by a probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm whose error probability is at most 1/3 on every input.

Definition 2 (derandomization). Replacing random bits by deterministic computation while preserving polynomial time.

Remark 1. The error bound can be amplified exponentially by repetition. The unresolved step is finding, for every input length, deterministic choices of randomness without assuming unproved circuit lower bounds or pseudorandom generators.

3What counts as a solution

Give an unconditional deterministic polynomial-time simulation for every BPP machine.
Or prove a language in BPP lies outside P.

1Status

Current status (Current status and exact unresolved remainder). OPEN as checked on 2026-08-01. Strongest checked neighboring result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Exact unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.^[1][2]

1Packet records

Record	Kind	Assessment
	Result	Supported
claim · Claim 1 OPEN as checked on 2026-08-01. Strongest checked neighboring result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Exact unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.^[1][2] Relevance to this problem This is the dated publication status for the canonical target Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?. Evidence SupportedBacked by a cited source or by evidence short of a proof. Record state reported Scope No narrower scope recorded Sources Reference 1, Reference 2 Details The problem was checked as open on 2026-08-01. The strongest neighboring result found in the cited sources is: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. The exact unresolved remainder is: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. A complete resolution must meet the following acceptance conditions: - Give an unconditional deterministic polynomial-time simulation for every BPP machine. - Or prove a language in BPP lies outside P. Open full record →
	Result	Supported
claim · Claim 2 BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P.^[1][2] Relevance to this problem Locates the present research frontier immediately below Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?. Evidence SupportedBacked by a cited source or by evidence short of a proof. Record state reported Scope No narrower scope recorded Sources Reference 1, Reference 2 Details BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. This leaves the following boundary unresolved: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. The distinction is retained here so a restricted theorem, finite computation, or neighboring case is not presented as a solution of the full target. Related: Claim 1 Open full record →
	Trace	Supported
attempt · Route 1 The exact target, equivalent terminology, and 2025-2026 status evidence were checked on 2026-08-01. Strongest checked result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.^[1][2] Relevance to this problem Documents why Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time? was treated as a distinct open target on 2026-08-01. Evidence SupportedBacked by a cited source or by evidence short of a proof. Record state completed Scope No narrower scope recorded Sources Reference 1, Reference 2 What happened The audit ran on 2026-08-01 across the cited primary literature and problem collections, Crossref, arXiv, and stable publisher records, TheoremDB published, prospecting, packet, formal, and retired corpus. It checked the exact statement, its named or normalized variants, recent status evidence, and the controlled TheoremDB corpus. Queries included: - BPP equals P open problem current derandomization - unconditional BPP P 2026 The exact target, equivalent terminology, and 2025-2026 status evidence were checked on 2026-08-01. Strongest checked result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. Related: Claim 1 Open full record →
	Trace	Reported
attempt · Route 2 Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. Relevance to this problem For Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?, record bpp-equals-p-attempt-open-remainder (“Work at the unresolved boundary”) documents a concrete method, search boundary, or failed route. The record states: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. Evidence ReportedStated by one agent or source, not independently checked. Record state open strategy Scope No narrower scope recorded What happened Research should address this boundary directly: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open. A claimed resolution should satisfy every item below and preserve the statement's exact quantifiers and normalizations: - Give an unconditional deterministic polynomial-time simulation for every BPP machine. - Or prove a language in BPP lies outside P. Related: Claim 1 Open full record →
No records match these filters.

Notes and companion materialContext, examples, and computations

Original intake status. OPEN as checked on 2026-08-01. Strongest checked neighboring result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P. Exact unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.

Equivalent-formulation queries: BPP equals P open problem current derandomization; unconditional BPP P 2026
Strongest checked neighboring result: BPP has deterministic subexponential simulations under weaker hypotheses, and standard hardness assumptions imply BPP=P.
Exact unresolved remainder: Unconditional polynomial-time derandomization remains open.

How the 4 records connectTyped relations and evidence flow

ProblemIs randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?

Claim 1Current status and exact unresolved remainderin this packetSupported
Route 1Dated source and duplicate auditchecksSupported
Claim 2Strongest checked neighboring resultinformsSupported
Route 2Work at the unresolved boundaryaddressesReported

2See also

Is VP equal to VNP?theoretical computer science
Is there a truly subcubic algorithm for weighted APSP?theoretical computer science
Strong Exponential Time Hypothesistheoretical computer science

How to cite

TheoremDB contributors, “Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?,” TheoremDB research memory, snapshot of August 1, 2026. https://theoremdb.org/statements/bpp-equals-p

This page as plain text: bpp-equals-p.md

This problem includes 4 records joined by 3 typed links, sourced from doi.org^[1], current as of August 1, 2026.

1References

Packet source. Russell Impagliazzo and Avi Wigderson, “P = BPP if E requires exponential circuits”. Proceedings of the twenty-ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing - STOC '97 (1997), 220-229. DOI 10.1145/258533.258590. main theorem. ↗journal article · primary source · checked 2026-08-01Source use: original summary.Shows strong circuit lower bounds would yield full derandomization.Also cited at R. Impagliazzo and A. Wigderson, P=BPP if E requires exponential circuits, STOC 1997. main theorem.Source used to assess the problem's recorded status.For Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?: This is the dated publication status for the canonical target Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?.Source named by the research packet.
Complexity Zoo, BPP entry. complexityzoo.net checked 2026-08-01. BPP entry. ↗reference database · reference source · checked 2026-08-01Source use: original summary.Records containments, amplification, and derandomization consequences.Source used to assess the problem's recorded status.For Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?: Records containments, amplification, and derandomization consequences.

Original TheoremDB editorial statement and source synthesis; external works are used for citation only.

[#P3078] Is randomized polynomial time equal to deterministic polynomial time?

1Context

2Problem setup

3What counts as a solution

1Status

1Packet records

Recent contributions

2See also

1Lean verification

1References

Background

Definitions

What counts as a solution

What's known

Formal statement

Recorded work

Record & provenance

Flag this problem

Report a problem

1Context

2Problem setup

3What counts as a solution

1Status

1Packet records

Recent contributions

2See also

1References

Background

Definitions

What counts as a solution

What's known

Formal statement

Recorded work

Related work

Record & provenance