A PSPACE Construction of a Hitting Set for the Closure of Small Algebraic Circuits

In this paper we study the complexity of constructing a hitting set for the closure of VP, the class of polynomials that can be infinitesimally approximated by polynomials that are computed by polynomial sized algebraic circuits, over the real or complex numbers. Specifically, we show that there is a PSPACE algorithm that given n,s,r in unary outputs a set of n-tuples over the rationals of size poly(n,s,r), with poly(n,s,r) bit complexity, that hits all n-variate polynomials of degree-r that are the limit of size-s algebraic circuits. Previously it was known that a random set of this size is a hitting set, but a construction that is certified to work was only known in EXPSPACE (or EXPH assuming the generalized Riemann hypothesis). As a corollary we get that a host of other algebraic problems such as Noether Normalization Lemma, can also be solved in PSPACE deterministically, where earlier only randomized algorithms and EXPSPACE algorithms (or EXPH assuming the generalized Riemann hypothesis) were known. The proof relies on the new notion of a robust hitting set which is a set of inputs such that any nonzero polynomial that can be computed by a polynomial size algebraic circuit, evaluates to a not too small value on at least one element of the set. Proving the existence of such a robust hitting set is the main technical difficulty in the proof. Our proof uses anti-concentration results for polynomials, basic tools from algebraic geometry and the existential theory of the reals

Algebraic Dependencies and PSPACE Algorithms in Approximative Complexity

Testing whether a set $\mathbf{f}$ of polynomials has an algebraic dependence is a basic problem with several applications. The polynomials are given as algebraic circuits. Algebraic independence testing question is wide open over finite fields (Dvir, Gabizon, Wigderson, FOCS'07). The best complexity known is NP$^{\#\rm P}$ (Mittmann, Saxena, Scheiblechner, Trans.AMS'14). In this work we put the problem in AM $\cap$ coAM. In particular, dependence testing is unlikely to be NP-hard and joins the league of problems of "intermediate" complexity, eg. graph isomorphism & integer factoring. Our proof method is algebro-geometric-- estimating the size of the image/preimage of the polynomial map $\mathbf{f}$ over the finite field. A gap in this size is utilized in the AM protocols. Next, we study the open question of testing whether every annihilator of $\mathbf{f}$ has zero constant term (Kayal, CCC'09). We give a geometric characterization using Zariski closure of the image of $\mathbf{f}$; introducing a new problem called approximate polynomials satisfiability (APS). We show that APS is NP-hard and, using projective algebraic-geometry ideas, we put APS in PSPACE (prior best was EXPSPACE via Grobner basis computation). As an unexpected application of this to approximative complexity theory we get-- Over any field, hitting-set for $\overline{\rm VP}$ can be designed in PSPACE. This solves an open problem posed in (Mulmuley, FOCS'12, J.AMS 2017); greatly mitigating the GCT Chasm (exponentially in terms of space complexity)

Algebraic Methods in Computational Complexity

Computational Complexity is concerned with the resources that are required for algorithms to detect properties of combinatorial objects and structures. It has often proven true that the best way to argue about these combinatorial objects is by establishing a connection (perhaps approximate) to a more well-behaved algebraic setting. Indeed, many of the deepest and most powerful results in Computational Complexity rely on algebraic proof techniques. The Razborov-Smolensky polynomial-approximation method for proving constant-depth circuit lower bounds, the PCP characterization of NP, and the Agrawal-Kayal-Saxena polynomial-time primality test are some of the most prominent examples. In some of the most exciting recent progress in Computational Complexity the algebraic theme still plays a central role. There have been significant recent advances in algebraic circuit lower bounds, and the so-called chasm at depth 4 suggests that the restricted models now being considered are not so far from ones that would lead to a general result. There have been similar successes concerning the related problems of polynomial identity testing and circuit reconstruction in the algebraic model (and these are tied to central questions regarding the power of randomness in computation). Also the areas of derandomization and coding theory have experimented important advances. The seminar aimed to capitalize on recent progress and bring together researchers who are using a diverse array of algebraic methods in a variety of settings. Researchers in these areas are relying on ever more sophisticated and specialized mathematics and the goal of the seminar was to play an important role in educating a diverse community about the latest new techniques