Tighter Relations Between Sensitivity and Other Complexity Measures

Sensitivity conjecture is a longstanding and fundamental open problem in the area of complexity measures of Boolean functions and decision tree complexity. The conjecture postulates that the maximum sensitivity of a Boolean function is polynomially related to other major complexity measures. Despite much attention to the problem and major advances in analysis of Boolean functions in the past decade, the problem remains wide open with no positive result toward the conjecture since the work of Kenyon and Kutin from 2004. In this work, we present new upper bounds for various complexity measures in terms of sensitivity improving the bounds provided by Kenyon and Kutin. Specifically, we show that deg(f)^{1-o(1)}=O(2^{s(f)}) and C(f) < 2^{s(f)-1} s(f); these in turn imply various corollaries regarding the relation between sensitivity and other complexity measures, such as block sensitivity, via known results. The gap between sensitivity and other complexity measures remains exponential but these results are the first improvement for this difficult problem that has been achieved in a decade.Comment: This is the merged form of arXiv submission 1306.4466 with another work. Appeared in ICALP 2014, 14 page

Testing Booleanity and the Uncertainty Principle

Let f:{-1,1}^n -> R be a real function on the hypercube, given by its discrete Fourier expansion, or, equivalently, represented as a multilinear polynomial. We say that it is Boolean if its image is in {-1,1}. We show that every function on the hypercube with a sparse Fourier expansion must either be Boolean or far from Boolean. In particular, we show that a multilinear polynomial with at most k terms must either be Boolean, or output values different than -1 or 1 for a fraction of at least 2/(k+2)^2 of its domain. It follows that given oracle access to f, together with the guarantee that its representation as a multilinear polynomial has at most k terms, one can test Booleanity using O(k^2) queries. We show an \Omega(k) queries lower bound for this problem. Our proof crucially uses Hirschman's entropic version of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.Comment: 15 page

Characterization and Lower Bounds for Branching Program Size using Projective Dimension

We study projective dimension, a graph parameter (denoted by pd$(G)$ for a graph $G$), introduced by (Pudl\'ak, R\"odl 1992), who showed that proving lower bounds for pd$(G_f)$ for bipartite graphs $G_f$ associated with a Boolean function $f$ imply size lower bounds for branching programs computing $f$. Despite several attempts (Pudl\'ak, R\"odl 1992 ; Babai, R\'{o}nyai, Ganapathy 2000), proving super-linear lower bounds for projective dimension of explicit families of graphs has remained elusive. We show that there exist a Boolean function $f$ (on $n$ bits) for which the gap between the projective dimension and size of the optimal branching program computing $f$ (denoted by bpsize$(f)$), is $2^{\Omega(n)}$. Motivated by the argument in (Pudl\'ak, R\"odl 1992), we define two variants of projective dimension - projective dimension with intersection dimension 1 (denoted by upd$(G)$) and bitwise decomposable projective dimension (denoted by bitpdim$(G)$). As our main result, we show that there is an explicit family of graphs on $N = 2^n$ vertices such that the projective dimension is $O(\sqrt{n})$, the projective dimension with intersection dimension $1$ is $\Omega(n)$ and the bitwise decomposable projective dimension is $\Omega(\frac{n^{1.5}}{\log n})$. We also show that there exist a Boolean function $f$ (on $n$ bits) for which the gap between upd$(G_f)$ and bpsize$(f)$ is $2^{\Omega(n)}$. In contrast, we also show that the bitwise decomposable projective dimension characterizes size of the branching program up to a polynomial factor. That is, there exists a constant $c>0$ and for any function $f$, $\textrm{bitpdim}(G_f)/6 \le \textrm{bpsize}(f) \le (\textrm{bitpdim}(G_f))^c$. We also study two other variants of projective dimension and show that they are exactly equal to well-studied graph parameters - bipartite clique cover number and bipartite partition number respectively.Comment: 24 pages, 3 figure

The quantum adversary method and classical formula size lower bounds

We introduce two new complexity measures for Boolean functions, or more generally for functions of the form f:S->T. We call these measures sumPI and maxPI. The quantity sumPI has been emerging through a line of research on quantum query complexity lower bounds via the so-called quantum adversary method [Amb02, Amb03, BSS03, Zha04, LM04], culminating in [SS04] with the realization that these many different formulations are in fact equivalent. Given that sumPI turns out to be such a robust invariant of a function, we begin to investigate this quantity in its own right and see that it also has applications to classical complexity theory. As a surprising application we show that sumPI^2(f) is a lower bound on the formula size, and even, up to a constant multiplicative factor, the probabilistic formula size of f. We show that several formula size lower bounds in the literature, specifically Khrapchenko and its extensions [Khr71, Kou93], including a key lemma of [Has98], are in fact special cases of our method. The second quantity we introduce, maxPI(f), is always at least as large as sumPI(f), and is derived from sumPI in such a way that maxPI^2(f) remains a lower bound on formula size. While sumPI(f) is always a lower bound on the quantum query complexity of f, this is not the case in general for maxPI(f). A strong advantage of sumPI(f) is that it has both primal and dual characterizations, and thus it is relatively easy to give both upper and lower bounds on the sumPI complexity of functions. To demonstrate this, we look at a few concrete examples, for three functions: recursive majority of three, a function defined by Ambainis, and the collision problem.Comment: Appears in Conference on Computational Complexity 200

Logic Meets Algebra: the Case of Regular Languages

The study of finite automata and regular languages is a privileged meeting point of algebra and logic. Since the work of Buchi, regular languages have been classified according to their descriptive complexity, i.e. the type of logical formalism required to define them. The algebraic point of view on automata is an essential complement of this classification: by providing alternative, algebraic characterizations for the classes, it often yields the only opportunity for the design of algorithms that decide expressibility in some logical fragment. We survey the existing results relating the expressibility of regular languages in logical fragments of MSO[S] with algebraic properties of their minimal automata. In particular, we show that many of the best known results in this area share the same underlying mechanics and rely on a very strong relation between logical substitutions and block-products of pseudovarieties of monoid. We also explain the impact of these connections on circuit complexity theory.Comment: 37 page

Some Applications of Coding Theory in Computational Complexity

Error-correcting codes and related combinatorial constructs play an important role in several recent (and old) results in computational complexity theory. In this paper we survey results on locally-testable and locally-decodable error-correcting codes, and their applications to complexity theory and to cryptography. Locally decodable codes are error-correcting codes with sub-linear time error-correcting algorithms. They are related to private information retrieval (a type of cryptographic protocol), and they are used in average-case complexity and to construct ``hard-core predicates'' for one-way permutations. Locally testable codes are error-correcting codes with sub-linear time error-detection algorithms, and they are the combinatorial core of probabilistically checkable proofs