Pseudorandomness for Approximate Counting and Sampling

We study computational procedures that use both randomness and nondeterminism. The goal of this paper is to derandomize such procedures under the weakest possible assumptions. Our main technical contribution allows one to “boost” a given hardness assumption: We show that if there is a problem in EXP that cannot be computed by poly-size nondeterministic circuits then there is one which cannot be computed by poly-size circuits that make non-adaptive NP oracle queries. This in particular shows that the various assumptions used over the last few years by several authors to derandomize Arthur-Merlin games (i.e., show AM = NP) are in fact all equivalent. We also define two new primitives that we regard as the natural pseudorandom objects associated with approximate counting and sampling of NP-witnesses. We use the “boosting” theorem and hashing techniques to construct these primitives using an assumption that is no stronger than that used to derandomize AM. We observe that Cai's proof that S_2^P ⊆ PP⊆(NP) and the learning algorithm of Bshouty et al. can be seen as reductions to sampling that are not probabilistic. As a consequence they can be derandomized under an assumption which is weaker than the assumption that was previously known to suffice

Query Complexity of Approximate Nash Equilibria

We study the query complexity of approximate notions of Nash equilibrium in games with a large number of players $n$. Our main result states that for $n$-player binary-action games and for constant $\varepsilon$, the query complexity of an $\varepsilon$-well-supported Nash equilibrium is exponential in $n$. One of the consequences of this result is an exponential lower bound on the rate of convergence of adaptive dynamics to approxiamte Nash equilibrium

Structurally Tractable Uncertain Data

Many data management applications must deal with data which is uncertain, incomplete, or noisy. However, on existing uncertain data representations, we cannot tractably perform the important query evaluation tasks of determining query possibility, certainty, or probability: these problems are hard on arbitrary uncertain input instances. We thus ask whether we could restrict the structure of uncertain data so as to guarantee the tractability of exact query evaluation. We present our tractability results for tree and tree-like uncertain data, and a vision for probabilistic rule reasoning. We also study uncertainty about order, proposing a suitable representation, and study uncertain data conditioned by additional observations.Comment: 11 pages, 1 figure, 1 table. To appear in SIGMOD/PODS PhD Symposium 201

Strengths and Weaknesses of Quantum Computing

Recently a great deal of attention has focused on quantum computation following a sequence of results suggesting that quantum computers are more powerful than classical probabilistic computers. Following Shor's result that factoring and the extraction of discrete logarithms are both solvable in quantum polynomial time, it is natural to ask whether all of NP can be efficiently solved in quantum polynomial time. In this paper, we address this question by proving that relative to an oracle chosen uniformly at random, with probability 1, the class NP cannot be solved on a quantum Turing machine in time $o(2^{n/2})$. We also show that relative to a permutation oracle chosen uniformly at random, with probability 1, the class $NP \cap coNP$ cannot be solved on a quantum Turing machine in time $o(2^{n/3})$. The former bound is tight since recent work of Grover shows how to accept the class NP relative to any oracle on a quantum computer in time $O(2^{n/2})$.Comment: 18 pages, latex, no figures, to appear in SIAM Journal on Computing (special issue on quantum computing

Smooth and Strong PCPs

Probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs) can be verified based only on a constant amount of random queries, such that any correct claim has a proof that is always accepted, and incorrect claims are rejected with high probability (regardless of the given alleged proof). We consider two possible features of PCPs: - A PCP is strong if it rejects an alleged proof of a correct claim with probability proportional to its distance from some correct proof of that claim. - A PCP is smooth if each location in a proof is queried with equal probability. We prove that all sets in NP have PCPs that are both smooth and strong, are of polynomial length, and can be verified based on a constant number of queries. This is achieved by following the proof of the PCP theorem of Arora, Lund, Motwani, Sudan and Szegedy (JACM, 1998), providing a stronger analysis of the Hadamard and Reed - Muller based PCPs and a refined PCP composition theorem. In fact, we show that any set in NP has a smooth strong canonical PCP of Proximity (PCPP), meaning that there is an efficiently computable bijection of NP witnesses to correct proofs. This improves on the recent construction of Dinur, Gur and Goldreich (ITCS, 2019) of PCPPs that are strong canonical but inherently non-smooth. Our result implies the hardness of approximating the satisfiability of "stable" 3CNF formulae with bounded variable occurrence, where stable means that the number of clauses violated by an assignment is proportional to its distance from a satisfying assignment (in the relative Hamming metric). This proves a hypothesis used in the work of Friggstad, Khodamoradi and Salavatipour (SODA, 2019), suggesting a connection between the hardness of these instances and other stable optimization problems

An Answer Explanation Model for Probabilistic Database Queries

Following the availability of huge amounts of uncertain data, coming from diverse ranges of applications such as sensors, machine learning or mining approaches, information extraction and integration, etc. in recent years, we have seen a revival of interests in probabilistic databases. Queries over these databases result in probabilistic answers. As the process of arriving at these answers is based on the underlying stored uncertain data, we argue that from the standpoint of an end user, it is helpful for such a system to give an explanation on how it arrives at an answer and on which uncertainty assumptions the derived answer is based. In this way, the user with his/her own knowledge can decide how much confidence to place in this probabilistic answer. \ud The aim of this paper is to design such an answer explanation model for probabilistic database queries. We report our design principles and show the methods to compute the answer explanations. One of the main contributions of our model is that it fills the gap between giving only the answer probability, and giving the full derivation. Furthermore, we show how to balance verifiability and influence of explanation components through the concept of verifiable views. The behavior of the model and its computational efficiency are demonstrated through an extensive performance study

Proving Differential Privacy with Shadow Execution

Recent work on formal verification of differential privacy shows a trend toward usability and expressiveness -- generating a correctness proof of sophisticated algorithm while minimizing the annotation burden on programmers. Sometimes, combining those two requires substantial changes to program logics: one recent paper is able to verify Report Noisy Max automatically, but it involves a complex verification system using customized program logics and verifiers. In this paper, we propose a new proof technique, called shadow execution, and embed it into a language called ShadowDP. ShadowDP uses shadow execution to generate proofs of differential privacy with very few programmer annotations and without relying on customized logics and verifiers. In addition to verifying Report Noisy Max, we show that it can verify a new variant of Sparse Vector that reports the gap between some noisy query answers and the noisy threshold. Moreover, ShadowDP reduces the complexity of verification: for all of the algorithms we have evaluated, type checking and verification in total takes at most 3 seconds, while prior work takes minutes on the same algorithms.Comment: 23 pages, 12 figures, PLDI'1