An Atypical Survey of Typical-Case Heuristic Algorithms

Heuristic approaches often do so well that they seem to pretty much always give the right answer. How close can heuristic algorithms get to always giving the right answer, without inducing seismic complexity-theoretic consequences? This article first discusses how a series of results by Berman, Buhrman, Hartmanis, Homer, Longpr\'{e}, Ogiwara, Sch\"{o}ening, and Watanabe, from the early 1970s through the early 1990s, explicitly or implicitly limited how well heuristic algorithms can do on NP-hard problems. In particular, many desirable levels of heuristic success cannot be obtained unless severe, highly unlikely complexity class collapses occur. Second, we survey work initiated by Goldreich and Wigderson, who showed how under plausible assumptions deterministic heuristics for randomized computation can achieve a very high frequency of correctness. Finally, we consider formal ways in which theory can help explain the effectiveness of heuristics that solve NP-hard problems in practice.Comment: This article is currently scheduled to appear in the December 2012 issue of SIGACT New

Randomness in completeness and space-bounded computations

The study of computational complexity investigates the role of various computational resources such as processing time, memory requirements, nondeterminism, randomness, nonuniformity, etc. to solve different types of computational problems. In this dissertation, we study the role of randomness in two fundamental areas of computational complexity: NP-completeness and space-bounded computations. The concept of completeness plays an important role in defining the notion of \u27hard\u27 problems in Computer Science. Intuitively, an NP-complete problem captures the difficulty of solving any problem in NP. Polynomial-time reductions are at the heart of defining completeness. However, there is no single notion of reduction; researchers identified various polynomial-time reductions such as many-one reduction, truth-table reduction, Turing reduction, etc. Each such notion of reduction induces a notion of completeness. Finding the relationships among various NP-completeness notions is a significant open problem. Our first result is about the separation of two such polynomial-time completeness notions for NP, namely, Turing completeness and many-one completeness. This is the first result that separates completeness notions for NP under a worst-case hardness hypothesis. Our next result involves a conjecture by Even, Selman, and Yacobi [ESY84,SY82] which states that there do not exist disjoint NP-pairs all of whose separators are NP-hard via Turing reductions. If true, this conjecture implies that a certain kind of probabilistic public-key cryptosystems is not secure. The conjecture is open for 30 years. We provide evidence in support of a variant of this conjecture. We show that if there exist certain secure one-way functions, then the ESY conjecture for the bounded-truth-table reduction holds. Now we turn our attention to space-bounded computations. We investigate probabilistic space-bounded machines that are allowed to access their random bits {\em multiple times}. Our main conceptual contribution here is to establish an interesting connection between derandomization of such probabilistic space-bounded machines and the derandomization of probabilistic time-bounded machines. In particular, we show that if we can derandomize a multipass machine even with a small number of passes over random tape and only O(log^2 n) random bits to deterministic polynomial-time, then BPTIME(n) ⊆ DTIME(2^{o(n)}). Note that if we restrict the number of random bits to O(log n), then we can trivially derandomize the machine to polynomial time. Furthermore, it can be shown that if we restrict the number of passes to O(1), we can still derandomize the machine to polynomial time. Thus our result implies that any extension beyond these trivialities will lead to an unknown derandomization of BPTIME(n). Our final contribution is about the derandomization of probabilistic time-bounded machines under branching program lower bounds. The standard method of derandomizing time-bounded probabilistic machines depends on various circuit lower bounds, which are notoriously hard to prove. We show that the derandomization of low-degree polynomial identity testing, a well-known problem in co-RP, can be obtained under certain branching program lower bounds. Note that branching programs are considered weaker model of computation than the Boolean circuits

Algebraic Hardness Versus Randomness in Low Characteristic

We show that lower bounds for explicit constant-variate polynomials over fields of characteristic p > 0 are sufficient to derandomize polynomial identity testing over fields of characteristic p. In this setting, existing work on hardness-randomness tradeoffs for polynomial identity testing requires either the characteristic to be sufficiently large or the notion of hardness to be stronger than the standard syntactic notion of hardness used in algebraic complexity. Our results make no restriction on the characteristic of the field and use standard notions of hardness. We do this by combining the Kabanets-Impagliazzo generator with a white-box procedure to take p-th roots of circuits computing a p-th power over fields of characteristic p. When the number of variables appearing in the circuit is bounded by some constant, this procedure turns out to be efficient, which allows us to bypass difficulties related to factoring circuits in characteristic p. We also combine the Kabanets-Impagliazzo generator with recent "bootstrapping" results in polynomial identity testing to show that a sufficiently-hard family of explicit constant-variate polynomials yields a near-complete derandomization of polynomial identity testing. This result holds over fields of both zero and positive characteristic and complements a recent work of Guo, Kumar, Saptharishi, and Solomon, who obtained a slightly stronger statement over fields of characteristic zero

Strong ETH Breaks With Merlin and Arthur: Short Non-Interactive Proofs of Batch Evaluation

We present an efficient proof system for Multipoint Arithmetic Circuit Evaluation: for every arithmetic circuit $C(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ of size $s$ and degree $d$ over a field ${\mathbb F}$, and any inputs $a_1,\ldots,a_K \in {\mathbb F}^n$, $\bullet$ the Prover sends the Verifier the values $C(a_1), \ldots, C(a_K) \in {\mathbb F}$ and a proof of $\tilde{O}(K \cdot d)$ length, and $\bullet$ the Verifier tosses $\textrm{poly}(\log(dK|{\mathbb F}|/\varepsilon))$ coins and can check the proof in about $\tilde{O}(K \cdot(n + d) + s)$ time, with probability of error less than $\varepsilon$. For small degree $d$, this "Merlin-Arthur" proof system (a.k.a. MA-proof system) runs in nearly-linear time, and has many applications. For example, we obtain MA-proof systems that run in $c^{n}$ time (for various $c < 2$) for the Permanent, $\#$Circuit-SAT for all sublinear-depth circuits, counting Hamiltonian cycles, and infeasibility of $0$-$1$ linear programs. In general, the value of any polynomial in Valiant's class ${\sf VP}$ can be certified faster than "exhaustive summation" over all possible assignments. These results strongly refute a Merlin-Arthur Strong ETH and Arthur-Merlin Strong ETH posed by Russell Impagliazzo and others. We also give a three-round (AMA) proof system for quantified Boolean formulas running in $2^{2n/3+o(n)}$ time, nearly-linear time MA-proof systems for counting orthogonal vectors in a collection and finding Closest Pairs in the Hamming metric, and a MA-proof system running in $n^{k/2+O(1)}$-time for counting $k$-cliques in graphs. We point to some potential future directions for refuting the Nondeterministic Strong ETH.Comment: 17 page

Algebraic Methods in Computational Complexity

From 11.10. to 16.10.2009, the Dagstuhl Seminar 09421 “Algebraic Methods in Computational Complexity “ was held in Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz Center for Informatics. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

Quantified Derandomization of Linear Threshold Circuits

One of the prominent current challenges in complexity theory is the attempt to prove lower bounds for $TC^0$, the class of constant-depth, polynomial-size circuits with majority gates. Relying on the results of Williams (2013), an appealing approach to prove such lower bounds is to construct a non-trivial derandomization algorithm for $TC^0$. In this work we take a first step towards the latter goal, by proving the first positive results regarding the derandomization of $TC^0$ circuits of depth $d>2$. Our first main result is a quantified derandomization algorithm for $TC^0$ circuits with a super-linear number of wires. Specifically, we construct an algorithm that gets as input a $TC^0$ circuit $C$ over $n$ input bits with depth $d$ and $n^{1+\exp(-d)}$ wires, runs in almost-polynomial-time, and distinguishes between the case that $C$ rejects at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs and the case that $C$ accepts at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs. In fact, our algorithm works even when the circuit $C$ is a linear threshold circuit, rather than just a $TC^0$ circuit (i.e., $C$ is a circuit with linear threshold gates, which are stronger than majority gates). Our second main result is that even a modest improvement of our quantified derandomization algorithm would yield a non-trivial algorithm for standard derandomization of all of $TC^0$, and would consequently imply that $NEXP\not\subseteq TC^0$. Specifically, if there exists a quantified derandomization algorithm that gets as input a $TC^0$ circuit with depth $d$ and $n^{1+O(1/d)}$ wires (rather than $n^{1+\exp(-d)}$ wires), runs in time at most $2^{n^{\exp(-d)}}$, and distinguishes between the case that $C$ rejects at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs and the case that $C$ accepts at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs, then there exists an algorithm with running time $2^{n^{1-\Omega(1)}}$ for standard derandomization of $TC^0$.Comment: Changes in this revision: An additional result (a PRG for quantified derandomization of depth-2 LTF circuits); rewrite of some of the exposition; minor correction