On Second-Order Monadic Monoidal and Groupoidal Quantifiers

We study logics defined in terms of second-order monadic monoidal and groupoidal quantifiers. These are generalized quantifiers defined by monoid and groupoid word-problems, equivalently, by regular and context-free languages. We give a computational classification of the expressive power of these logics over strings with varying built-in predicates. In particular, we show that ATIME(n) can be logically characterized in terms of second-order monadic monoidal quantifiers

A Casual Tour Around a Circuit Complexity Bound

I will discuss the recent proof that the complexity class NEXP (nondeterministic exponential time) lacks nonuniform ACC circuits of polynomial size. The proof will be described from the perspective of someone trying to discover it.Comment: 21 pages, 2 figures. An earlier version appeared in SIGACT News, September 201

A Superpolynomial Lower Bound on the Size of Uniform Non-constant-depth Threshold Circuits for the Permanent

We show that the permanent cannot be computed by DLOGTIME-uniform threshold or arithmetic circuits of depth o(log log n) and polynomial size.Comment: 11 page

Faster all-pairs shortest paths via circuit complexity

We present a new randomized method for computing the min-plus product (a.k.a., tropical product) of two $n \times n$ matrices, yielding a faster algorithm for solving the all-pairs shortest path problem (APSP) in dense $n$-node directed graphs with arbitrary edge weights. On the real RAM, where additions and comparisons of reals are unit cost (but all other operations have typical logarithmic cost), the algorithm runs in time $$\frac{n^3}{2^{\Omega(\log n)^{1/2}}}$$ and is correct with high probability. On the word RAM, the algorithm runs in $n^3/2^{\Omega(\log n)^{1/2}} + n^{2+o(1)}\log M$ time for edge weights in $([0,M] \cap {\mathbb Z})\cup\{\infty\}$. Prior algorithms used either $n^3/(\log^c n)$ time for various $c \leq 2$, or $O(M^{\alpha}n^{\beta})$ time for various $\alpha > 0$ and $\beta > 2$. The new algorithm applies a tool from circuit complexity, namely the Razborov-Smolensky polynomials for approximately representing ${\sf AC}^0[p]$ circuits, to efficiently reduce a matrix product over the $(\min,+)$ algebra to a relatively small number of rectangular matrix products over ${\mathbb F}_2$, each of which are computable using a particularly efficient method due to Coppersmith. We also give a deterministic version of the algorithm running in $n^3/2^{\log^{\delta} n}$ time for some $\delta > 0$, which utilizes the Yao-Beigel-Tarui translation of ${\sf AC}^0[m]$ circuits into "nice" depth-two circuits.Comment: 24 pages. Updated version now has slightly faster running time. To appear in ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 201

Functional Lower Bounds for Restricted Arithmetic Circuits of Depth Four

Recently, Forbes, Kumar and Saptharishi [CCC, 2016] proved that there exists an explicit $d^{O(1)}$-variate and degree $d$ polynomial $P_{d}\in VNP$ such that if any depth four circuit $C$ of bounded formal degree $d$ which computes a polynomial of bounded individual degree $O(1)$, that is functionally equivalent to $P_d$, then $C$ must have size $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{d}\log{d})}$. The motivation for their work comes from Boolean Circuit Complexity. Based on a characterization for $ACC^0$ circuits by Yao [FOCS, 1985] and Beigel and Tarui [CC, 1994], Forbes, Kumar and Saptharishi [CCC, 2016] observed that functions in $ACC^0$ can also be computed by algebraic $\Sigma\mathord{\wedge}\Sigma\Pi$ circuits (i.e., circuits of the form -- sums of powers of polynomials) of $2^{\log^{O(1)}n}$ size. Thus they argued that a $2^{\omega(\log^{O(1)}{n})}$ "functional" lower bound for an explicit polynomial $Q$ against $\Sigma\mathord{\wedge}\Sigma\Pi$ circuits would imply a lower bound for the "corresponding Boolean function" of $Q$ against non-uniform $ACC^0$. In their work, they ask if their lower bound be extended to $\Sigma\mathord{\wedge}\Sigma\Pi$ circuits. In this paper, for large integers $n$ and $d$ such that $\omega(\log^2n)\leq d\leq n^{0.01}$, we show that any $\Sigma\mathord{\wedge}\Sigma\Pi$ circuit of bounded individual degree at most $O\left(\frac{d}{k^2}\right)$ that functionally computes Iterated Matrix Multiplication polynomial $IMM_{n,d}$ ($\in VP$) over $\{0,1\}^{n^2d}$ must have size $n^{\Omega(k)}$. Since Iterated Matrix Multiplication $IMM_{n,d}$ over $\{0,1\}^{n^2d}$ is functionally in $GapL$, improvement of the afore mentioned lower bound to hold for quasipolynomially large values of individual degree would imply a fine-grained separation of $ACC^0$ from $GapL$

Smaller ACC0 Circuits for Symmetric Functions

What is the power of constant-depth circuits with $MOD_m$ gates, that can count modulo $m$? Can they efficiently compute MAJORITY and other symmetric functions? When $m$ is a constant prime power, the answer is well understood: Razborov and Smolensky proved in the 1980s that MAJORITY and $MOD_m$ require super-polynomial-size $MOD_q$ circuits, where $q$ is any prime power not dividing $m$. However, relatively little is known about the power of $MOD_m$ circuits for non-prime-power $m$. For example, it is still open whether every problem in $EXP$ can be computed by depth-$3$ circuits of polynomial size and only $MOD_6$ gates. We shed some light on the difficulty of proving lower bounds for $MOD_m$ circuits, by giving new upper bounds. We construct $MOD_m$ circuits computing symmetric functions with non-prime power $m$, with size-depth tradeoffs that beat the longstanding lower bounds for $AC^0[m]$ circuits for prime power $m$. Our size-depth tradeoff circuits have essentially optimal dependence on $m$ and $d$ in the exponent, under a natural circuit complexity hypothesis. For example, we show for every $\varepsilon > 0$ that every symmetric function can be computed with depth-3 $MOD_m$ circuits of $\exp(O(n^{\varepsilon}))$ size, for a constant $m$ depending only on $\varepsilon > 0$. That is, depth-$3$ $CC^0$ circuits can compute any symmetric function in \emph{subexponential} size. This demonstrates a significant difference in the power of depth-$3$ $CC^0$ circuits, compared to other models: for certain symmetric functions, depth-$3$ $AC^0$ circuits require $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n})}$ size [H{\aa}stad 1986], and depth-$3$ $AC^0[p^k]$ circuits (for fixed prime power $p^k$) require $2^{\Omega(n^{1/6})}$ size [Smolensky 1987]. Even for depth-two $MOD_p \circ MOD_m$ circuits, $2^{\Omega(n)}$ lower bounds were known [Barrington Straubing Th\'erien 1990].Comment: 15 pages; abstract edited to fit arXiv requirement

A Superpolynomial Lower Bound on the Size of Uniform Non-constant-depth Threshold Circuits for the Permanent

11 pagesWe show that the permanent cannot be computed by DLOGTIME-uniform threshold or arithmetic circuits of depth o(log log n) and polynomial size