Depth Reduction for Circuits with a Single Layer of Modular Counting Gates

We consider the class of constant depth AND/OR circuits augmented with a layer of modular counting gates at the bottom layer, i.e ${AC}^0 circ {MOD}_m$ circuits. We show that the following holds for several types of gates $G$: by adding a gate of type $G$ at the output, it is possible to obtain an equivalent randomized depth 2 circuit of quasipolynomial size consisting of a gate of type $G$ at the output and a layer of modular counting gates, i.e $G circ {MOD}_m$ circuits. The types of gates $G$ we consider are modular counting gates and threshold-style gates. For all of these, strong lower bounds are known for (deterministic) $G circ {MOD}_m$ circuits

Circuits on Cylinders

We consider the computational power of constant width polynomial size cylindrical circuits and nondeterministic branching programs. We show that every function computed by a Pi_2 o MOD o AC^0 circuit can also be computed by a constant width polynomial size cylindrical nondeterministic branching program (or cylindrical circuit) and that every function computed by a constant width polynomial size cylindrical circuit belongs to ACC^0

Size and Energy of Threshold Circuits Computing Mod Functions

Abstract. Let C be a threshold logic circuit computing a Boolean function MODm : {0, 1} n → {0, 1}, where n ≥ 1 and m ≥ 2. Then C outputs "0" if the number of "1"s in an input x ∈ {0, 1} n to C is a multiple of m and, otherwise, C outputs "1." The function MOD2 is the so-called PARITY function, and MODn+1 is the OR function. Let s be the size of the circuit C, that is, C consists of s threshold gates, and let e be the energy complexity of C, that is, at most e gates in C output "1" for any input x ∈ {0, 1} n . In the paper, we prove that a very simple inequality n/(m − 1) ≤ s e holds for every circuit C computing MODm. The inequality implies that there is a tradeoff between the size s and energy complexity e of threshold circuits computing MODm, and yields a lower bound e = Ω((log n − log m)/ log log n) on e if s = O(polylog(n)). We actually obtain a general result on the so-called generalized mod function, from which the result on the ordinary mod function MODm immediately follows. Our results on threshold circuits can be extended to a more general class of circuits, called unate circuits

Smaller ACC0 Circuits for Symmetric Functions

What is the power of constant-depth circuits with $MOD_m$ gates, that can count modulo $m$? Can they efficiently compute MAJORITY and other symmetric functions? When $m$ is a constant prime power, the answer is well understood: Razborov and Smolensky proved in the 1980s that MAJORITY and $MOD_m$ require super-polynomial-size $MOD_q$ circuits, where $q$ is any prime power not dividing $m$. However, relatively little is known about the power of $MOD_m$ circuits for non-prime-power $m$. For example, it is still open whether every problem in $EXP$ can be computed by depth-$3$ circuits of polynomial size and only $MOD_6$ gates. We shed some light on the difficulty of proving lower bounds for $MOD_m$ circuits, by giving new upper bounds. We construct $MOD_m$ circuits computing symmetric functions with non-prime power $m$, with size-depth tradeoffs that beat the longstanding lower bounds for $AC^0[m]$ circuits for prime power $m$. Our size-depth tradeoff circuits have essentially optimal dependence on $m$ and $d$ in the exponent, under a natural circuit complexity hypothesis. For example, we show for every $\varepsilon > 0$ that every symmetric function can be computed with depth-3 $MOD_m$ circuits of $\exp(O(n^{\varepsilon}))$ size, for a constant $m$ depending only on $\varepsilon > 0$. That is, depth-$3$ $CC^0$ circuits can compute any symmetric function in \emph{subexponential} size. This demonstrates a significant difference in the power of depth-$3$ $CC^0$ circuits, compared to other models: for certain symmetric functions, depth-$3$ $AC^0$ circuits require $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n})}$ size [H{\aa}stad 1986], and depth-$3$ $AC^0[p^k]$ circuits (for fixed prime power $p^k$) require $2^{\Omega(n^{1/6})}$ size [Smolensky 1987]. Even for depth-two $MOD_p \circ MOD_m$ circuits, $2^{\Omega(n)}$ lower bounds were known [Barrington Straubing Th\'erien 1990].Comment: 15 pages; abstract edited to fit arXiv requirement

Violating Constant Degree Hypothesis Requires Breaking Symmetry

The Constant Degree Hypothesis was introduced by Barrington et. al. (1990) to study some extensions of $q$-groups by nilpotent groups and the power of these groups in a certain computational model. In its simplest formulation, it establishes exponential lower bounds for $\mathrm{AND}_d \circ \mathrm{MOD}_m \circ \mathrm{MOD}_q$ circuits computing AND of unbounded arity $n$ (for constant integers $d,m$ and a prime $q$). While it has been proved in some special cases (including $d=1$), it remains wide open in its general form for over 30 years. In this paper we prove that the hypothesis holds when we restrict our attention to symmetric circuits with $m$ being a prime. While we build upon techniques by Grolmusz and Tardos (2000), we have to prove a new symmetric version of their Degree Decreasing Lemma and apply it in a highly non-trivial way. Moreover, to establish the result we perform a careful analysis of automorphism groups of $\mathrm{AND} \circ \mathrm{MOD}_m$ subcircuits and study the periodic behaviour of the computed functions. Finally, our methods also yield lower bounds when $d$ is treated as a function of $n$