Conspiracies between learning algorithms, circuit lower bounds, and pseudorandomness

We prove several results giving new and stronger connections between learning theory, circuit complexity and pseudorandomness. Let C be any typical class of Boolean circuits, and C[s(n)] denote n-variable C-circuits of size ≤ s(n). We show: Learning Speedups. If C[poly(n)] admits a randomized weak learning algorithm under the uniform distribution with membership queries that runs in time 2n/nω(1), then for every k ≥ 1 and ε > 0 the class C[n k ] can be learned to high accuracy in time O(2n ε ). There is ε > 0 such that C[2n ε ] can be learned in time 2n/nω(1) if and only if C[poly(n)] can be learned in time 2(log n) O(1) . Equivalences between Learning Models. We use learning speedups to obtain equivalences between various randomized learning and compression models, including sub-exponential time learning with membership queries, sub-exponential time learning with membership and equivalence queries, probabilistic function compression and probabilistic average-case function compression. A Dichotomy between Learnability and Pseudorandomness. In the non-uniform setting, there is non-trivial learning for C[poly(n)] if and only if there are no exponentially secure pseudorandom functions computable in C[poly(n)]. Lower Bounds from Nontrivial Learning. If for each k ≥ 1, (depth-d)-C[n k ] admits a randomized weak learning algorithm with membership queries under the uniform distribution that runs in time 2n/nω(1), then for each k ≥ 1, BPE * (depth-d)-C[n k ]. If for some ε > 0 there are P-natural proofs useful against C[2n ε ], then ZPEXP * C[poly(n)]. Karp-Lipton Theorems for Probabilistic Classes. If there is a k > 0 such that BPE ⊆ i.o.Circuit[n k ], then BPEXP ⊆ i.o.EXP/O(log n). If ZPEXP ⊆ i.o.Circuit[2n/3 ], then ZPEXP ⊆ i.o.ESUBEXP. Hardness Results for MCSP. All functions in non-uniform NC1 reduce to the Minimum Circuit Size Problem via truth-table reductions computable by TC0 circuits. In particular, if MCSP ∈ TC0 then NC1 = TC0

Conspiracies Between Learning Algorithms, Circuit Lower Bounds, and Pseudorandomness

We prove several results giving new and stronger connections between learning theory, circuit complexity and pseudorandomness. Let C be any typical class of Boolean circuits, and C[s(n)] denote n-variable C-circuits of size <= s(n). We show: Learning Speedups: If C[s(n)] admits a randomized weak learning algorithm under the uniform distribution with membership queries that runs in time 2^n/n^{omega(1)}, then for every k >= 1 and epsilon > 0 the class C[n^k] can be learned to high accuracy in time O(2^{n^epsilon}). There is epsilon > 0 such that C[2^{n^{epsilon}}] can be learned in time 2^n/n^{omega(1)} if and only if C[poly(n)] can be learned in time 2^{(log(n))^{O(1)}}. Equivalences between Learning Models: We use learning speedups to obtain equivalences between various randomized learning and compression models, including sub-exponential time learning with membership queries, sub-exponential time learning with membership and equivalence queries, probabilistic function compression and probabilistic average-case function compression. A Dichotomy between Learnability and Pseudorandomness: In the non-uniform setting, there is non-trivial learning for C[poly(n)] if and only if there are no exponentially secure pseudorandom functions computable in C[poly(n)]. Lower Bounds from Nontrivial Learning: If for each k >= 1, (depth-d)-C[n^k] admits a randomized weak learning algorithm with membership queries under the uniform distribution that runs in time 2^n/n^{omega(1)}, then for each k >= 1, BPE is not contained in (depth-d)-C[n^k]. If for some epsilon > 0 there are P-natural proofs useful against C[2^{n^{epsilon}}], then ZPEXP is not contained in C[poly(n)]. Karp-Lipton Theorems for Probabilistic Classes: If there is a k > 0 such that BPE is contained in i.o.Circuit[n^k], then BPEXP is contained in i.o.EXP/O(log(n)). If ZPEXP is contained in i.o.Circuit[2^{n/3}], then ZPEXP is contained in i.o.ESUBEXP. Hardness Results for MCSP: All functions in non-uniform NC^1 reduce to the Minimum Circuit Size Problem via truth-table reductions computable by TC^0 circuits. In particular, if MCSP is in TC^0 then NC^1 = TC^0

Closing the Gap Between Short and Long XORs for Model Counting

Many recent algorithms for approximate model counting are based on a reduction to combinatorial searches over random subsets of the space defined by parity or XOR constraints. Long parity constraints (involving many variables) provide strong theoretical guarantees but are computationally difficult. Short parity constraints are easier to solve but have weaker statistical properties. It is currently not known how long these parity constraints need to be. We close the gap by providing matching necessary and sufficient conditions on the required asymptotic length of the parity constraints. Further, we provide a new family of lower bounds and the first non-trivial upper bounds on the model count that are valid for arbitrarily short XORs. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of these bounds on model counting benchmarks and in a Satisfiability Modulo Theory (SMT) application motivated by the analysis of contingency tables in statistics.Comment: The 30th Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16) Conferenc

Complexity Theory

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryNational Science Foundation / CCR-9315696Originally published July 1995; revision published November 1995 with the same tech report number

Advanced Algorithms for Abstract Dialectical Frameworks based on Complexity Analysis of Subclasses and SAT Solving

dialectical frameworks (ADFs) constitute one of the most powerful formalisms in abstract argumentation. Their high computational complexity poses, however, certain challenges when designing efficient systems. In this paper, we tackle this issue by (i) analyzing the complexity of ADFs under structural restrictions, (ii) presenting novel algorithms which make use of these insights, and (iii) implementing these algorithms via (multiple) calls to SAT solvers. An empirical evaluation of the resulting implementation on ADF benchmarks generated from ICCMA competitions shows that our solver is able to outperform state-of-the-art ADF systems. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.Peer reviewe