Conditional Lower Bounds for Dynamic Geometric Measure Problems

We give new polynomial lower bounds for a number of dynamic measure problems in computational geometry. These lower bounds hold in the Word-RAM model, conditioned on the hardness of either 3SUM, APSP, or the Online Matrix-Vector Multiplication problem [Henzinger et al., STOC 2015]. In particular we get lower bounds in the incremental and fully-dynamic settings for counting maximal or extremal points in R^3, different variants of Klee's Measure Problem, problems related to finding the largest empty disk in a set of points, and querying the size of the i'th convex layer in a planar set of points. We also answer a question of Chan et al. [SODA 2022] by giving a conditional lower bound for dynamic approximate square set cover. While many conditional lower bounds for dynamic data structures have been proven since the seminal work of Patrascu [STOC 2010], few of them relate to computational geometry problems. This is the first paper focusing on this topic. Most problems we consider can be solved in O(n log n) time in the static case and their dynamic versions have only been approached from the perspective of improving known upper bounds. One exception to this is Klee's measure problem in R^2, for which Chan [CGTA 2010] gave an unconditional ${\Omega}(\sqrt{n})$ lower bound on the worst-case update time. By a similar approach, we show that such a lower bound also holds for an important special case of Klee's measure problem in R^3 known as the Hypervolume Indicator problem, even for amortized runtime in the incremental setting.Comment: Improved presentation, improved the reduction for the Hypervolume Indicator problem and added a reduction for dynamic approximate square set cove

Depth-4 Lower Bounds, Determinantal Complexity : A Unified Approach

Tavenas has recently proved that any n^{O(1)}-variate and degree n polynomial in VP can be computed by a depth-4 circuit of size 2^{O(\sqrt{n}\log n)}. So to prove VP not equal to VNP, it is sufficient to show that an explicit polynomial in VNP of degree n requires 2^{\omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)} size depth-4 circuits. Soon after Tavenas's result, for two different explicit polynomials, depth-4 circuit size lower bounds of 2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)} have been proved Kayal et al. and Fournier et al. In particular, using combinatorial design Kayal et al.\ construct an explicit polynomial in VNP that requires depth-4 circuits of size 2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)} and Fournier et al.\ show that iterated matrix multiplication polynomial (which is in VP) also requires 2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)} size depth-4 circuits. In this paper, we identify a simple combinatorial property such that any polynomial f that satisfies the property would achieve similar circuit size lower bound for depth-4 circuits. In particular, it does not matter whether f is in VP or in VNP. As a result, we get a very simple unified lower bound analysis for the above mentioned polynomials. Another goal of this paper is to compare between our current knowledge of depth-4 circuit size lower bounds and determinantal complexity lower bounds. We prove the that the determinantal complexity of iterated matrix multiplication polynomial is \Omega(dn) where d is the number of matrices and n is the dimension of the matrices. So for d=n, we get that the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial achieves the current best known lower bounds in both fronts: depth-4 circuit size and determinantal complexity. To the best of our knowledge, a \Theta(n) bound for the determinantal complexity for the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial was known only for constant d>1 by Jansen.Comment: Extension of the previous uploa

On the rank of n×nn\times n matrix multiplication

For every $p\leq n$ positive integer we obtain the lower bound $(3-\frac{1}{p+1})n^2-\big(2\binom{2p}{p+1}-\binom{2p-2}{p-1}+2\big)n$ for the rank of the $n\times n$ matrix multiplication. This bound improves the previous one $(3-\frac{1}{p+1})n^2-\big(1+2p\binom{2p}{p}\big)n$ due to Landsberg. Furthermore our bound improves the classic bound $\frac{5}{2}n^2-3n$, due to Bl\"aser, for every $n\geq 132$. Finally, for $p = 2$, with a sligtly different strategy we menage to obtain the lower bound $\frac{8}{3}n^2-7n$ which improves Bl\"aser's bound for any $n\geq 24$.Comment: 10 pages. New version, title and main result changed. Linear Algebra and its Applications 201

On the Limits of Depth Reduction at Depth 3 Over Small Finite Fields

Recently, Gupta et.al. [GKKS2013] proved that over Q any $n^{O(1)}$-variate and $n$-degree polynomial in VP can also be computed by a depth three $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit of size $2^{O(\sqrt{n}\log^{3/2}n)}$. Over fixed-size finite fields, Grigoriev and Karpinski proved that any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit that computes $Det_n$ (or $Perm_n$) must be of size $2^{\Omega(n)}$ [GK1998]. In this paper, we prove that over fixed-size finite fields, any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit for computing the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial of $n$ generic matrices of size $n\times n$, must be of size $2^{\Omega(n\log n)}$. The importance of this result is that over fixed-size fields there is no depth reduction technique that can be used to compute all the $n^{O(1)}$-variate and $n$-degree polynomials in VP by depth 3 circuits of size $2^{o(n\log n)}$. The result [GK1998] can only rule out such a possibility for depth 3 circuits of size $2^{o(n)}$. We also give an example of an explicit polynomial ($NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$) in VNP (not known to be in VP), for which any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit computing it (over fixed-size fields) must be of size $2^{\Omega(n\log n)}$. The polynomial we consider is constructed from the combinatorial design. An interesting feature of this result is that we get the first examples of two polynomials (one in VP and one in VNP) such that they have provably stronger circuit size lower bounds than Permanent in a reasonably strong model of computation. Next, we prove that any depth 4 $\Sigma\Pi^{[O(\sqrt{n})]}\Sigma\Pi^{[\sqrt{n}]}$ circuit computing $NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$ (over any field) must be of size $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)}$. To the best of our knowledge, the polynomial $NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$ is the first example of an explicit polynomial in VNP such that it requires $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)}$ size depth four circuits, but no known matching upper bound

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

Improved Lower Bounds for Testing Triangle-freeness in Boolean Functions via Fast Matrix Multiplication

Understanding the query complexity for testing linear-invariant properties has been a central open problem in the study of algebraic property testing. Triangle-freeness in Boolean functions is a simple property whose testing complexity is unknown. Three Boolean functions $f_1$, $f_2$ and $f_3: \mathbb{F}_2^k \to \{0, 1\}$ are said to be triangle free if there is no $x, y \in \mathbb{F}_2^k$ such that $f_1(x) = f_2(y) = f_3(x + y) = 1$. This property is known to be strongly testable (Green 2005), but the number of queries needed is upper-bounded only by a tower of twos whose height is polynomial in 1 / \epsislon, where \epsislon is the distance between the tested function triple and triangle-freeness, i.e., the minimum fraction of function values that need to be modified to make the triple triangle free. A lower bound of $(1 / \epsilon)^{2.423}$ for any one-sided tester was given by Bhattacharyya and Xie (2010). In this work we improve this bound to $(1 / \epsilon)^{6.619}$. Interestingly, we prove this by way of a combinatorial construction called \emph{uniquely solvable puzzles} that was at the heart of Coppersmith and Winograd's renowned matrix multiplication algorithm