Lower Bounds for DeMorgan Circuits of Bounded Negation Width

We consider Boolean circuits over {or, and, neg} with negations applied only to input variables. To measure the "amount of negation" in such circuits, we introduce the concept of their "negation width". In particular, a circuit computing a monotone Boolean function f(x_1,...,x_n) has negation width w if no nonzero term produced (purely syntactically) by the circuit contains more than w distinct negated variables. Circuits of negation width w=0 are equivalent to monotone Boolean circuits, while those of negation width w=n have no restrictions. Our motivation is that already circuits of moderate negation width w=n^{epsilon} for an arbitrarily small constant epsilon>0 can be even exponentially stronger than monotone circuits. We show that the size of any circuit of negation width w computing f is roughly at least the minimum size of a monotone circuit computing f divided by K=min{w^m,m^w}, where m is the maximum length of a prime implicant of f. We also show that the depth of any circuit of negation width w computing f is roughly at least the minimum depth of a monotone circuit computing f minus log K. Finally, we show that formulas of bounded negation width can be balanced to achieve a logarithmic (in their size) depth without increasing their negation width

Shrinkage of Decision Lists and DNF Formulas

We establish nearly tight bounds on the expected shrinkage of decision lists and DNF formulas under the p-random restriction R_p for all values of p ? [0,1]. For a function f with domain {0,1}?, let DL(f) denote the minimum size of a decision list that computes f. We show that E[DL(f ? R_p)] ? DL(f)^log_{2/(1-p)}((1+p)/(1-p)). For example, this bound is ?{DL(f)} when p = ?5-2 ? 0.24. For Boolean functions f, we obtain the same shrinkage bound with respect to DNF formula size plus 1 (i.e., replacing DL(?) with DNF(?)+1 on both sides of the inequality)

Sum-of-Squares Lower Bounds for the Minimum Circuit Size Problem

We prove lower bounds for the Minimum Circuit Size Problem (MCSP) in the Sum-of-Squares (SoS) proof system. Our main result is that for every Boolean function $f: \{0,1\}^n \rightarrow \{0,1\}$, SoS requires degree $\Omega(s^{1-\epsilon})$ to prove that $f$ does not have circuits of size $s$ (for any $s > \mathrm{poly}(n)$). As a corollary we obtain that there are no low degree SoS proofs of the statement NP $\not \subseteq$ P/poly. We also show that for any $0 < \alpha < 1$ there are Boolean functions with circuit complexity larger than $2^{n^{\alpha}}$ but SoS requires size $2^{2^{\Omega(n^{\alpha})}}$ to prove this. In addition we prove analogous results on the minimum \emph{monotone} circuit size for monotone Boolean slice functions. Our approach is quite general. Namely, we show that if a proof system $Q$ has strong enough constraint satisfaction problem lower bounds that only depend on good expansion of the constraint-variable incidence graph and, furthermore, $Q$ is expressive enough that variables can be substituted by local Boolean functions, then the MCSP problem is hard for $Q$.Comment: A conference version appeared previously in CCC'2

Pseudorandomness from Shrinkage

One powerful theme in complexity theory and pseudorandomness in the past few decades has been the use lower bounds to give pseudorandom generators (PRGs). However, the general results using this hardness vs. randomness paradigm suffer a quantitative loss in parameters, and hence do not give nontrivial implications for models where we don’t know super-polynomial lower bounds but do know lower bounds of a fixed polynomial. We show that when such lower bounds are proved using random restrictions, we can construct PRGs which are essentially best possible without in turn improving the lower bounds. More specifically, say that a circuit family has shrinkage exponent Γ if a random restriction leaving a p fraction of variables unset shrinks the size of any circuit in the family by a factor of pΓ+o(1). Our PRG uses a seed of length s1/(Γ+1)+o(1) to fool circuits in the family of size s. By using this generic construction, we get PRGs with polynomially small error for the following classes of circuits of size s and with the following seed lengths: 1. For de Morgan formulas, seed length s1/3+o(1); 2. For formulas over an arbitrary basis, seed length s1/2+o(1); 3. For read-once de Morgan formulas, seed length s.234...; 4. For branching programs of size s, seed length s1/2+o(1). The previous best PRGs known for these classes used seeds of length bigger than n/2 to output n bits, and worked only when the size s = O(n) [BPW11]

Unconditional Lower Bounds in Complexity Theory

This work investigates the hardness of solving natural computational problems according to different complexity measures. Our results and techniques span several areas in theoretical computer science and discrete mathematics. They have in common the following aspects: (i) the results are unconditional, i.e., they rely on no unproven hardness assumption from complexity theory; (ii) the corresponding lower bounds are essentially optimal. Among our contributions, we highlight the following results. Constraint Satisfaction Problems and Monotone Complexity. We introduce a natural formulation of the satisfiability problem as a monotone function, and prove a near-optimal 2^{Ω (n/log n)} lower bound on the size of monotone formulas solving k-SAT on n-variable instances (for a large enough k ∈ ℕ). More generally, we investigate constraint satisfaction problems according to the geometry of their constraints, i.e., as a function of the hypergraph describing which variables appear in each constraint. Our results show in a certain technical sense that the monotone circuit depth complexity of the satisfiability problem is polynomially related to the tree-width of the corresponding graphs. Interactive Protocols and Communication Complexity. We investigate interactive compression protocols, a hybrid model between computational complexity and communication complexity. We prove that the communication complexity of the Majority function on n-bit inputs with respect to Boolean circuits of size s and depth d extended with modulo p gates is precisely n/log^{ϴ(d)} s, where p is a fixed prime number, and d ∈ ℕ. Further, we establish a strong round-separation theorem for bounded-depth circuits, showing that (r+1)-round protocols can be substantially more efficient than r-round protocols, for every r ∈ ℕ. Negations in Computational Learning Theory. We study the learnability of circuits containing a given number of negation gates, a measure that interpolates between monotone functions, and the class of all functions. Let C^t_n be the class of Boolean functions on n input variables that can be computed by Boolean circuits with at most t negations. We prove that any algorithm that learns every f ∈ C^t_n with membership queries according to the uniform distribution to accuracy ε has query complexity 2^{Ω (2^t sqrt(n)/ε)} (for a large range of these parameters). Moreover, we give an algorithm that learns C^t_n from random examples only, and with a running time that essentially matches this information-theoretic lower bound. Negations in Theory of Cryptography. We investigate the power of negation gates in cryptography and related areas, and prove that many basic cryptographic primitives require essentially the maximum number of negations among all Boolean functions. In other words, cryptography is highly non-monotone. Our results rely on a variety of techniques, and give near-optimal lower bounds for pseudorandom functions, error-correcting codes, hardcore predicates, randomness extractors, and small-bias generators. Algorithms versus Circuit Lower Bounds. We strengthen a few connections between algorithms and circuit lower bounds. We show that the design of faster algorithms in some widely investigated learning models would imply new unconditional lower bounds in complexity theory. In addition, we prove that the existence of non-trivial satisfiability algorithms for certain classes of Boolean circuits of depth d+2 leads to lower bounds for the corresponding class of circuits of depth d. These results show that either there are no faster algorithms for some computational tasks, or certain circuit lower bounds hold