Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP

Let $P:\{0,1\}^k \to \{0,1\}$ be a nontrivial $k$-ary predicate. Consider a random instance of the constraint satisfaction problem $\mathrm{CSP}(P)$ on $n$ variables with $\Delta n$ constraints, each being $P$ applied to $k$ randomly chosen literals. Provided the constraint density satisfies $\Delta \gg 1$, such an instance is unsatisfiable with high probability. The \emph{refutation} problem is to efficiently find a proof of unsatisfiability. We show that whenever the predicate $P$ supports a $t$-\emph{wise uniform} probability distribution on its satisfying assignments, the sum of squares (SOS) algorithm of degree $d = \Theta(\frac{n}{\Delta^{2/(t-1)} \log \Delta})$ (which runs in time $n^{O(d)}$) \emph{cannot} refute a random instance of $\mathrm{CSP}(P)$. In particular, the polynomial-time SOS algorithm requires $\widetilde{\Omega}(n^{(t+1)/2})$ constraints to refute random instances of CSP$(P)$ when $P$ supports a $t$-wise uniform distribution on its satisfying assignments. Together with recent work of Lee et al. [LRS15], our result also implies that \emph{any} polynomial-size semidefinite programming relaxation for refutation requires at least $\widetilde{\Omega}(n^{(t+1)/2})$ constraints. Our results (which also extend with no change to CSPs over larger alphabets) subsume all previously known lower bounds for semialgebraic refutation of random CSPs. For every constraint predicate~$P$, they give a three-way hardness tradeoff between the density of constraints, the SOS degree (hence running time), and the strength of the refutation. By recent algorithmic results of Allen et al. [AOW15] and Raghavendra et al. [RRS16], this full three-way tradeoff is \emph{tight}, up to lower-order factors.Comment: 39 pages, 1 figur

From average case complexity to improper learning complexity

The basic problem in the PAC model of computational learning theory is to determine which hypothesis classes are efficiently learnable. There is presently a dearth of results showing hardness of learning problems. Moreover, the existing lower bounds fall short of the best known algorithms. The biggest challenge in proving complexity results is to establish hardness of {\em improper learning} (a.k.a. representation independent learning).The difficulty in proving lower bounds for improper learning is that the standard reductions from $\mathbf{NP}$-hard problems do not seem to apply in this context. There is essentially only one known approach to proving lower bounds on improper learning. It was initiated in (Kearns and Valiant 89) and relies on cryptographic assumptions. We introduce a new technique for proving hardness of improper learning, based on reductions from problems that are hard on average. We put forward a (fairly strong) generalization of Feige's assumption (Feige 02) about the complexity of refuting random constraint satisfaction problems. Combining this assumption with our new technique yields far reaching implications. In particular, 1. Learning $\mathrm{DNF}$'s is hard. 2. Agnostically learning halfspaces with a constant approximation ratio is hard. 3. Learning an intersection of $\omega(1)$ halfspaces is hard.Comment: 34 page

Strongly Refuting Random CSPs Below the Spectral Threshold

Random constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) are known to exhibit threshold phenomena: given a uniformly random instance of a CSP with $n$ variables and $m$ clauses, there is a value of $m = \Omega(n)$ beyond which the CSP will be unsatisfiable with high probability. Strong refutation is the problem of certifying that no variable assignment satisfies more than a constant fraction of clauses; this is the natural algorithmic problem in the unsatisfiable regime (when $m/n = \omega(1)$). Intuitively, strong refutation should become easier as the clause density $m/n$ grows, because the contradictions introduced by the random clauses become more locally apparent. For CSPs such as $k$-SAT and $k$-XOR, there is a long-standing gap between the clause density at which efficient strong refutation algorithms are known, $m/n \ge \widetilde O(n^{k/2-1})$, and the clause density at which instances become unsatisfiable with high probability, $m/n = \omega (1)$. In this paper, we give spectral and sum-of-squares algorithms for strongly refuting random $k$-XOR instances with clause density $m/n \ge \widetilde O(n^{(k/2-1)(1-\delta)})$ in time $\exp(\widetilde O(n^{\delta}))$ or in $\widetilde O(n^{\delta})$ rounds of the sum-of-squares hierarchy, for any $\delta \in [0,1)$ and any integer $k \ge 3$. Our algorithms provide a smooth transition between the clause density at which polynomial-time algorithms are known at $\delta = 0$, and brute-force refutation at the satisfiability threshold when $\delta = 1$. We also leverage our $k$-XOR results to obtain strong refutation algorithms for SAT (or any other Boolean CSP) at similar clause densities. Our algorithms match the known sum-of-squares lower bounds due to Grigoriev and Schonebeck, up to logarithmic factors. Additionally, we extend our techniques to give new results for certifying upper bounds on the injective tensor norm of random tensors