29 research outputs found
Tighter Connections between Derandomization and Circuit Lower Bounds
We tighten the connections between circuit lower bounds and derandomization for each of the following three types of derandomization:
- general derandomization of promiseBPP (connected to Boolean circuits),
- derandomization of Polynomial Identity Testing (PIT) over fixed finite fields (connected to arithmetic circuit lower bounds over the same field), and
- derandomization of PIT over the integers (connected to arithmetic circuit lower bounds over the integers).
We show how to make these connections uniform equivalences, although at the expense of using somewhat less common versions of complexity classes and for a less studied notion of inclusion.
Our main results are as follows:
1. We give the first proof that a non-trivial (nondeterministic subexponential-time) algorithm for PIT over a fixed finite field yields arithmetic circuit lower bounds.
2. We get a similar result for the case of PIT over the integers, strengthening a result of Jansen and Santhanam [JS12] (by removing the need for advice).
3. We derive a Boolean circuit lower bound for NEXP intersect coNEXP from the assumption of sufficiently strong non-deterministic derandomization of promiseBPP (without advice), as well as from the assumed existence of an NP-computable non-empty property of Boolean functions useful for proving superpolynomial circuit lower bounds (in the sense of natural proofs of [RR97]); this strengthens the related results of [IKW02].
4. Finally, we turn all of these implications into equivalences for appropriately defined promise classes and for a notion of robust inclusion/separation (inspired by [FS11]) that lies between the classical "almost everywhere" and "infinitely often" notions
Complexity Theory
Computational Complexity Theory is the mathematical study of the intrinsic power and limitations of computational resources like time, space, or randomness. The current workshop focused on recent developments in various sub-areas including arithmetic complexity, Boolean complexity, communication complexity, cryptography, probabilistic proof systems, pseudorandomness, and quantum computation. Many of the developements are related to diverse mathematical fields such as algebraic geometry, combinatorial number theory, probability theory, quantum mechanics, representation theory, and the theory of error-correcting codes
Separation Between Read-once Oblivious Algebraic Branching Programs (ROABPs) and Multilinear Depth Three Circuits
We show an exponential separation between two well-studied models of algebraic computation, namely read-once oblivious algebraic branching programs (ROABPs) and multilinear depth three circuits. In particular we show the following:
1. There exists an explicit n-variate polynomial computable by linear sized multilinear depth three circuits (with only two product gates) such that every ROABP computing it requires 2^{Omega(n)} size.
2. Any multilinear depth three circuit computing IMM_{n,d} (the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial formed by multiplying d, n * n symbolic matrices) has n^{Omega(d)} size. IMM_{n,d} can be easily computed by a poly(n,d) sized ROABP.
3. Further, the proof of 2 yields an exponential separation between multilinear depth four and multilinear depth three circuits: There is an explicit n-variate, degree d polynomial computable by a poly(n,d) sized multilinear depth four circuit such that any multilinear depth three circuit computing it has size n^{Omega(d)}. This improves upon the quasi-polynomial separation result by Raz and Yehudayoff [2009] between these two models.
The hard polynomial in 1 is constructed using a novel application of expander graphs in conjunction with the evaluation dimension measure used previously in Nisan [1991], Raz [2006,2009], Raz and Yehudayoff [2009], and Forbes and Shpilka [2013], while 2 is proved via a new adaptation of the dimension of the partial derivatives measure used by Nisan and Wigderson [1997]. Our lower bounds hold over any field
Circuit complexity, proof complexity, and polynomial identity testing
We introduce a new algebraic proof system, which has tight connections to
(algebraic) circuit complexity. In particular, we show that any
super-polynomial lower bound on any Boolean tautology in our proof system
implies that the permanent does not have polynomial-size algebraic circuits
(VNP is not equal to VP). As a corollary to the proof, we also show that
super-polynomial lower bounds on the number of lines in Polynomial Calculus
proofs (as opposed to the usual measure of number of monomials) imply the
Permanent versus Determinant Conjecture. Note that, prior to our work, there
was no proof system for which lower bounds on an arbitrary tautology implied
any computational lower bound.
Our proof system helps clarify the relationships between previous algebraic
proof systems, and begins to shed light on why proof complexity lower bounds
for various proof systems have been so much harder than lower bounds on the
corresponding circuit classes. In doing so, we highlight the importance of
polynomial identity testing (PIT) for understanding proof complexity.
More specifically, we introduce certain propositional axioms satisfied by any
Boolean circuit computing PIT. We use these PIT axioms to shed light on
AC^0[p]-Frege lower bounds, which have been open for nearly 30 years, with no
satisfactory explanation as to their apparent difficulty. We show that either:
a) Proving super-polynomial lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege implies VNP does not
have polynomial-size circuits of depth d - a notoriously open question for d at
least 4 - thus explaining the difficulty of lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege, or
b) AC^0[p]-Frege cannot efficiently prove the depth d PIT axioms, and hence we
have a lower bound on AC^0[p]-Frege.
Using the algebraic structure of our proof system, we propose a novel way to
extend techniques from algebraic circuit complexity to prove lower bounds in
proof complexity
Complexity Theory
Computational Complexity Theory is the mathematical study of the intrinsic power and limitations of computational resources like time, space, or randomness. The current workshop focused on recent developments in various sub-areas including arithmetic complexity, Boolean complexity, communication complexity, cryptography, probabilistic proof systems, pseudorandomness, and quantum computation. Many of the developments are related to diverse mathematical fields such as algebraic geometry, combinatorial number theory, probability theory, representation theory, and the theory of error-correcting codes
Deterministic Black-Box Identity Testing -Ordered Algebraic Branching Programs
In this paper we study algebraic branching programs (ABPs) with restrictions
on the order and the number of reads of variables in the program. Given a
permutation of variables, for a -ordered ABP (-OABP), for
any directed path from source to sink, a variable can appear at most once
on , and the order in which variables appear on must respect . An
ABP is said to be of read , if any variable appears at most times in
. Our main result pertains to the identity testing problem. Over any field
and in the black-box model, i.e. given only query access to the polynomial,
we have the following result: read -OABP computable polynomials can be
tested in \DTIME[2^{O(r\log r \cdot \log^2 n \log\log n)}].
Our next set of results investigates the computational limitations of OABPs.
It is shown that any OABP computing the determinant or permanent requires size
and read . We give a multilinear polynomial
in variables over some specifically selected field , such that
any OABP computing must read some variable at least times. We show
that the elementary symmetric polynomial of degree in variables can be
computed by a size read OABP, but not by a read OABP, for
any . Finally, we give an example of a polynomial and two
variables orders , such that can be computed by a read-once
-OABP, but where any -OABP computing must read some variable at
least $2^n
Succinct Hitting Sets and Barriers to Proving Lower Bounds for Algebraic Circuits
We formalize a framework of algebraically natural lower bounds for algebraic circuits. Just as with the natural proofs notion of Razborov and Rudich (1997) for Boolean circuit lower bounds, our notion of algebraically natural lower bounds captures nearly all lower bound techniques known. However, unlike in the Boolean setting, there has been no concrete evidence demonstrating that this is a barrier to obtaining super-polynomial lower bounds for general algebraic circuits, as there is little understanding whether algebraic circuits are expressive enough to support “cryptography” secure against algebraic circuits.
Following a similar result of Williams (2016) in the Boolean setting, we show that the existence of an algebraic natural proofs barrier is equivalent to the existence of succinct derandomization of the polynomial identity testing problem, that is, to the existence of a hitting set for the class of poly(N)-degree poly(N)-size circuits which consists of coefficient vectors of polynomials of polylog(N) degree with polylog(N)-size circuits. Further, we give an explicit universal construction showing that if such a succinct hitting set exists, then our universal construction suffices.
Further, we assess the existing literature constructing hitting sets for restricted classes of algebraic circuits and observe that none of them are succinct as given. Yet, we show how to modify some of these constructions to obtain succinct hitting sets. This constitutes the first evidence supporting the existence of an algebraic natural proofs barrier.
Our framework is similar to the Geometric Complexity Theory (GCT) program of Mulmuley and Sohoni (2001), except that here we emphasize constructiveness of the proofs while the GCT program emphasizes symmetry. Nevertheless, our succinct hitting sets have relevance to the GCT program as they imply lower bounds for the complexity of the defining equations of polynomials computed by small circuits.
A conference version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2017)