  Specifying a computational problem requires fixing encodings for input and
output: encoding graphs as adjacency matrices, characters as integers, integers
as bit strings, and vice versa. For such discrete data, the actual encoding is
usually straightforward and/or complexity-theoretically inessential (up to
polynomial time, say); but concerning continuous data, already real numbers
naturally suggest various encodings (so-called REPRESENTATIONS) with very
different properties, ranging from the computably 'unreasonable' binary
expansion via qualitatively to polynomially and even linearly
complexity-theoretically 'reasonable' signed-digit expansion. But how to
distinguish between un/suitable encodings of other spaces common in Calculus
and Numerics, such as Sobolev?
  With respect to qualitative computability, Kreitz and Weihrauch (1985) had
identified ADMISSIBILITY as crucial criterion for a representation over the
Cantor space of infinite binary sequences to be 'reasonable'; cmp.
[doi:10.1007/11780342_48]. Refining computability over topological to
complexity over metric spaces, we develop the theory of POLYNOMIAL/LINEAR
ADMISSIBILITY as two quantitative refinements of qualitative admissibility.
  We also rephrase quantitative admissibility as quantitative continuity of
both the representation and of its set-valued inverse, the latter adopting from
[doi:10.4115/jla.2013.5.7] a new notion of 'sequential' continuity for
multifunctions. By establishing a quantitative continuous selection theorem for
multifunctions between compact ultrametric spaces, we can extend our above
quantitative MAIN THEOREM from functions to multifunctions aka search problems.
Higher-type complexity is captured by generalizing Cantor's (and Baire's)
ground space for encodings to other (compact) ULRAmetric spaces.
