Alternation-Trading Proofs, Linear Programming, and Lower Bounds

A fertile area of recent research has demonstrated concrete polynomial time lower bounds for solving natural hard problems on restricted computational models. Among these problems are Satisfiability, Vertex Cover, Hamilton Path, Mod6-SAT, Majority-of-Majority-SAT, and Tautologies, to name a few. The proofs of these lower bounds follow a certain proof-by-contradiction strategy that we call alternation-trading. An important open problem is to determine how powerful such proofs can possibly be. We propose a methodology for studying these proofs that makes them amenable to both formal analysis and automated theorem proving. We prove that the search for better lower bounds can often be turned into a problem of solving a large series of linear programming instances. Implementing a small-scale theorem prover based on this result, we extract new human-readable time lower bounds for several problems. This framework can also be used to prove concrete limitations on the current techniques.Comment: To appear in STACS 2010, 12 page

Finding the Median (Obliviously) with Bounded Space

We prove that any oblivious algorithm using space $S$ to find the median of a list of $n$ integers from $\{1,...,2n\}$ requires time $\Omega(n \log\log_S n)$. This bound also applies to the problem of determining whether the median is odd or even. It is nearly optimal since Chan, following Munro and Raman, has shown that there is a (randomized) selection algorithm using only $s$ registers, each of which can store an input value or $O(\log n)$-bit counter, that makes only $O(\log\log_s n)$ passes over the input. The bound also implies a size lower bound for read-once branching programs computing the low order bit of the median and implies the analog of $P \ne NP \cap coNP$ for length $o(n \log\log n)$ oblivious branching programs

Multi-Head Finite Automata: Characterizations, Concepts and Open Problems

Multi-head finite automata were introduced in (Rabin, 1964) and (Rosenberg, 1966). Since that time, a vast literature on computational and descriptional complexity issues on multi-head finite automata documenting the importance of these devices has been developed. Although multi-head finite automata are a simple concept, their computational behavior can be already very complex and leads to undecidable or even non-semi-decidable problems on these devices such as, for example, emptiness, finiteness, universality, equivalence, etc. These strong negative results trigger the study of subclasses and alternative characterizations of multi-head finite automata for a better understanding of the nature of non-recursive trade-offs and, thus, the borderline between decidable and undecidable problems. In the present paper, we tour a fragment of this literature

Two-Way Automata Making Choices Only at the Endmarkers

The question of the state-size cost for simulation of two-way nondeterministic automata (2NFAs) by two-way deterministic automata (2DFAs) was raised in 1978 and, despite many attempts, it is still open. Subsequently, the problem was attacked by restricting the power of 2DFAs (e.g., using a restricted input head movement) to the degree for which it was already possible to derive some exponential gaps between the weaker model and the standard 2NFAs. Here we use an opposite approach, increasing the power of 2DFAs to the degree for which it is still possible to obtain a subexponential conversion from the stronger model to the standard 2DFAs. In particular, it turns out that subexponential conversion is possible for two-way automata that make nondeterministic choices only when the input head scans one of the input tape endmarkers. However, there is no restriction on the input head movement. This implies that an exponential gap between 2NFAs and 2DFAs can be obtained only for unrestricted 2NFAs using capabilities beyond the proposed new model. As an additional bonus, conversion into a machine for the complement of the original language is polynomial in this model. The same holds for making such machines self-verifying, halting, or unambiguous. Finally, any superpolynomial lower bound for the simulation of such machines by standard 2DFAs would imply LNL. In the same way, the alternating version of these machines is related to L =? NL =? P, the classical computational complexity problems.Comment: 23 page

Pebbling, Entropy and Branching Program Size Lower Bounds

We contribute to the program of proving lower bounds on the size of branching programs solving the Tree Evaluation Problem introduced by Cook et. al. (2012). Proving a super-polynomial lower bound for the size of nondeterministic thrifty branching programs (NTBP) would separate $NL$ from $P$ for thrifty models solving the tree evaluation problem. First, we show that {\em Read-Once NTBPs} are equivalent to whole black-white pebbling algorithms thus showing a tight lower bound (ignoring polynomial factors) for this model. We then introduce a weaker restriction of NTBPs called {\em Bitwise Independence}. The best known NTBPs (of size $O(k^{h/2+1})$) for the tree evaluation problem given by Cook et. al. (2012) are Bitwise Independent. As our main result, we show that any Bitwise Independent NTBP solving $TEP_{2}^{h}(k)$ must have at least $\frac{1}{2}k^{h/2}$ states. Prior to this work, lower bounds were known for NTBPs only for fixed heights $h=2,3,4$ (See Cook et. al. (2012)). We prove our results by associating a fractional black-white pebbling strategy with any bitwise independent NTBP solving the Tree Evaluation Problem. Such a connection was not known previously even for fixed heights. Our main technique is the entropy method introduced by Jukna and Z{\'a}k (2001) originally in the context of proving lower bounds for read-once branching programs. We also show that the previous lower bounds given by Cook et. al. (2012) for deterministic branching programs for Tree Evaluation Problem can be obtained using this approach. Using this method, we also show tight lower bounds for any $k$-way deterministic branching program solving Tree Evaluation Problem when the instances are restricted to have the same group operation in all internal nodes.Comment: 25 Pages, Manuscript submitted to Journal in June 2013 This version includes a proof for tight size bounds for (syntactic) read-once NTBPs. The proof is in the same spirit as the proof for size bounds for bitwise independent NTBPs present in the earlier version of the paper and is included in the journal version of the paper submitted in June 201