56,062 research outputs found

    A Nearly Optimal Lower Bound on the Approximate Degree of AC0^0

    Full text link
    The approximate degree of a Boolean function f ⁣:{βˆ’1,1}nβ†’{βˆ’1,1}f \colon \{-1, 1\}^n \rightarrow \{-1, 1\} is the least degree of a real polynomial that approximates ff pointwise to error at most 1/31/3. We introduce a generic method for increasing the approximate degree of a given function, while preserving its computability by constant-depth circuits. Specifically, we show how to transform any Boolean function ff with approximate degree dd into a function FF on O(nβ‹…polylog⁑(n))O(n \cdot \operatorname{polylog}(n)) variables with approximate degree at least D=Ξ©(n1/3β‹…d2/3)D = \Omega(n^{1/3} \cdot d^{2/3}). In particular, if d=n1βˆ’Ξ©(1)d= n^{1-\Omega(1)}, then DD is polynomially larger than dd. Moreover, if ff is computed by a polynomial-size Boolean circuit of constant depth, then so is FF. By recursively applying our transformation, for any constant Ξ΄>0\delta > 0 we exhibit an AC0^0 function of approximate degree Ξ©(n1βˆ’Ξ΄)\Omega(n^{1-\delta}). This improves over the best previous lower bound of Ξ©(n2/3)\Omega(n^{2/3}) due to Aaronson and Shi (J. ACM 2004), and nearly matches the trivial upper bound of nn that holds for any function. Our lower bounds also apply to (quasipolynomial-size) DNFs of polylogarithmic width. We describe several applications of these results. We give: * For any constant Ξ΄>0\delta > 0, an Ξ©(n1βˆ’Ξ΄)\Omega(n^{1-\delta}) lower bound on the quantum communication complexity of a function in AC0^0. * A Boolean function ff with approximate degree at least C(f)2βˆ’o(1)C(f)^{2-o(1)}, where C(f)C(f) is the certificate complexity of ff. This separation is optimal up to the o(1)o(1) term in the exponent. * Improved secret sharing schemes with reconstruction procedures in AC0^0.Comment: 40 pages, 1 figur

    Analyzing tree distribution and abundance in Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve: developing geostatistical Bayesian models with count data

    Get PDF
    Master's Project (M.S.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2018Species distribution models (SDMs) describe the relationship between where a species occurs and underlying environmental conditions. For this project, I created SDMs for the five tree species that occur in Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve (YUCH) in order to gain insight into which environmental covariates are important for each species, and what effect each environmental condition has on that species' expected occurrence or abundance. I discuss some of the issues involved in creating SDMs, including whether or not to incorporate spatially explicit error terms, and if so, how to do so with generalized linear models (GLMs, which have discrete responses). I ran a total of 10 distinct geostatistical SDMs using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (Bayesian methods), and discuss the results here. I also compare these results from YUCH with results from a similar analysis conducted in Denali National Park and Preserve (DNPP)

    Algorithms and lower bounds for de Morgan formulas of low-communication leaf gates

    Get PDF
    The class FORMULA[s]∘GFORMULA[s] \circ \mathcal{G} consists of Boolean functions computable by size-ss de Morgan formulas whose leaves are any Boolean functions from a class G\mathcal{G}. We give lower bounds and (SAT, Learning, and PRG) algorithms for FORMULA[n1.99]∘GFORMULA[n^{1.99}]\circ \mathcal{G}, for classes G\mathcal{G} of functions with low communication complexity. Let R(k)(G)R^{(k)}(\mathcal{G}) be the maximum kk-party NOF randomized communication complexity of G\mathcal{G}. We show: (1) The Generalized Inner Product function GIPnkGIP^k_n cannot be computed in FORMULA[s]∘GFORMULA[s]\circ \mathcal{G} on more than 1/2+Ξ΅1/2+\varepsilon fraction of inputs for s=o ⁣(n2(kβ‹…4kβ‹…R(k)(G)β‹…log⁑(n/Ξ΅)β‹…log⁑(1/Ξ΅))2). s = o \! \left ( \frac{n^2}{ \left(k \cdot 4^k \cdot {R}^{(k)}(\mathcal{G}) \cdot \log (n/\varepsilon) \cdot \log(1/\varepsilon) \right)^{2}} \right). As a corollary, we get an average-case lower bound for GIPnkGIP^k_n against FORMULA[n1.99]∘PTFkβˆ’1FORMULA[n^{1.99}]\circ PTF^{k-1}. (2) There is a PRG of seed length n/2+O(sβ‹…R(2)(G)β‹…log⁑(s/Ξ΅)β‹…log⁑(1/Ξ΅))n/2 + O\left(\sqrt{s} \cdot R^{(2)}(\mathcal{G}) \cdot\log(s/\varepsilon) \cdot \log (1/\varepsilon) \right) that Ξ΅\varepsilon-fools FORMULA[s]∘GFORMULA[s] \circ \mathcal{G}. For FORMULA[s]∘LTFFORMULA[s] \circ LTF, we get the better seed length O(n1/2β‹…s1/4β‹…log⁑(n)β‹…log⁑(n/Ξ΅))O\left(n^{1/2}\cdot s^{1/4}\cdot \log(n)\cdot \log(n/\varepsilon)\right). This gives the first non-trivial PRG (with seed length o(n)o(n)) for intersections of nn half-spaces in the regime where Ρ≀1/n\varepsilon \leq 1/n. (3) There is a randomized 2nβˆ’t2^{n-t}-time #\#SAT algorithm for FORMULA[s]∘GFORMULA[s] \circ \mathcal{G}, where t=Ξ©(nsβ‹…log⁑2(s)β‹…R(2)(G))1/2.t=\Omega\left(\frac{n}{\sqrt{s}\cdot\log^2(s)\cdot R^{(2)}(\mathcal{G})}\right)^{1/2}. In particular, this implies a nontrivial #SAT algorithm for FORMULA[n1.99]∘LTFFORMULA[n^{1.99}]\circ LTF. (4) The Minimum Circuit Size Problem is not in FORMULA[n1.99]∘XORFORMULA[n^{1.99}]\circ XOR. On the algorithmic side, we show that FORMULA[n1.99]∘XORFORMULA[n^{1.99}] \circ XOR can be PAC-learned in time 2O(n/log⁑n)2^{O(n/\log n)}
    • …
    corecore