5,412 research outputs found

    Hardness of Approximate Nearest Neighbor Search

    Full text link
    We prove conditional near-quadratic running time lower bounds for approximate Bichromatic Closest Pair with Euclidean, Manhattan, Hamming, or edit distance. Specifically, unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) is false, for every δ>0\delta>0 there exists a constant ϵ>0\epsilon>0 such that computing a (1+ϵ)(1+\epsilon)-approximation to the Bichromatic Closest Pair requires n2−δn^{2-\delta} time. In particular, this implies a near-linear query time for Approximate Nearest Neighbor search with polynomial preprocessing time. Our reduction uses the Distributed PCP framework of [ARW'17], but obtains improved efficiency using Algebraic Geometry (AG) codes. Efficient PCPs from AG codes have been constructed in other settings before [BKKMS'16, BCGRS'17], but our construction is the first to yield new hardness results

    On Closest Pair in Euclidean Metric: Monochromatic is as Hard as Bichromatic

    Get PDF
    Given a set of n points in R^d, the (monochromatic) Closest Pair problem asks to find a pair of distinct points in the set that are closest in the l_p-metric. Closest Pair is a fundamental problem in Computational Geometry and understanding its fine-grained complexity in the Euclidean metric when d=omega(log n) was raised as an open question in recent works (Abboud-Rubinstein-Williams [FOCS\u2717], Williams [SODA\u2718], David-Karthik-Laekhanukit [SoCG\u2718]). In this paper, we show that for every p in R_{>= 1} cup {0}, under the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH), for every epsilon>0, the following holds: - No algorithm running in time O(n^{2-epsilon}) can solve the Closest Pair problem in d=(log n)^{Omega_{epsilon}(1)} dimensions in the l_p-metric. - There exists delta = delta(epsilon)>0 and c = c(epsilon)>= 1 such that no algorithm running in time O(n^{1.5-epsilon}) can approximate Closest Pair problem to a factor of (1+delta) in d >= c log n dimensions in the l_p-metric. In particular, our first result is shown by establishing the computational equivalence of the bichromatic Closest Pair problem and the (monochromatic) Closest Pair problem (up to n^{epsilon} factor in the running time) for d=(log n)^{Omega_epsilon(1)} dimensions. Additionally, under SETH, we rule out nearly-polynomial factor approximation algorithms running in subquadratic time for the (monochromatic) Maximum Inner Product problem where we are given a set of n points in n^{o(1)}-dimensional Euclidean space and are required to find a pair of distinct points in the set that maximize the inner product. At the heart of all our proofs is the construction of a dense bipartite graph with low contact dimension, i.e., we construct a balanced bipartite graph on n vertices with n^{2-epsilon} edges whose vertices can be realized as points in a (log n)^{Omega_epsilon(1)}-dimensional Euclidean space such that every pair of vertices which have an edge in the graph are at distance exactly 1 and every other pair of vertices are at distance greater than 1. This graph construction is inspired by the construction of locally dense codes introduced by Dumer-Miccancio-Sudan [IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory\u2703]

    Strategic Issues, Problems and Challenges in Inductive Theorem Proving

    Get PDF
    Abstract(Automated) Inductive Theorem Proving (ITP) is a challenging field in automated reasoning and theorem proving. Typically, (Automated) Theorem Proving (TP) refers to methods, techniques and tools for automatically proving general (most often first-order) theorems. Nowadays, the field of TP has reached a certain degree of maturity and powerful TP systems are widely available and used. The situation with ITP is strikingly different, in the sense that proving inductive theorems in an essentially automatic way still is a very challenging task, even for the most advanced existing ITP systems. Both in general TP and in ITP, strategies for guiding the proof search process are of fundamental importance, in automated as well as in interactive or mixed settings. In the paper we will analyze and discuss the most important strategic and proof search issues in ITP, compare ITP with TP, and argue why ITP is in a sense much more challenging. More generally, we will systematically isolate, investigate and classify the main problems and challenges in ITP w.r.t. automation, on different levels and from different points of views. Finally, based on this analysis we will present some theses about the state of the art in the field, possible criteria for what could be considered as substantial progress, and promising lines of research for the future, towards (more) automated ITP

    On the Complexity of Closest Pair via Polar-Pair of Point-Sets

    Get PDF
    Every graph G can be represented by a collection of equi-radii spheres in a d-dimensional metric Delta such that there is an edge uv in G if and only if the spheres corresponding to u and v intersect. The smallest integer d such that G can be represented by a collection of spheres (all of the same radius) in Delta is called the sphericity of G, and if the collection of spheres are non-overlapping, then the value d is called the contact-dimension of G. In this paper, we study the sphericity and contact dimension of the complete bipartite graph K_{n,n} in various L^p-metrics and consequently connect the complexity of the monochromatic closest pair and bichromatic closest pair problems

    21st Annual Fulbright Symposium - Harmony and Dissonance in International Law

    Get PDF
    Conference proceedings from The 21st Annual Fulbright Symposium on International Legal Problems

    21st Annual Fulbright Symposium - Harmony and Dissonance in International Law

    Get PDF
    Conference proceedings from The 21st Annual Fulbright Symposium on International Legal Problems
    • …
    corecore