Circuit complexity, proof complexity, and polynomial identity testing

We introduce a new algebraic proof system, which has tight connections to (algebraic) circuit complexity. In particular, we show that any super-polynomial lower bound on any Boolean tautology in our proof system implies that the permanent does not have polynomial-size algebraic circuits (VNP is not equal to VP). As a corollary to the proof, we also show that super-polynomial lower bounds on the number of lines in Polynomial Calculus proofs (as opposed to the usual measure of number of monomials) imply the Permanent versus Determinant Conjecture. Note that, prior to our work, there was no proof system for which lower bounds on an arbitrary tautology implied any computational lower bound. Our proof system helps clarify the relationships between previous algebraic proof systems, and begins to shed light on why proof complexity lower bounds for various proof systems have been so much harder than lower bounds on the corresponding circuit classes. In doing so, we highlight the importance of polynomial identity testing (PIT) for understanding proof complexity. More specifically, we introduce certain propositional axioms satisfied by any Boolean circuit computing PIT. We use these PIT axioms to shed light on AC^0[p]-Frege lower bounds, which have been open for nearly 30 years, with no satisfactory explanation as to their apparent difficulty. We show that either: a) Proving super-polynomial lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege implies VNP does not have polynomial-size circuits of depth d - a notoriously open question for d at least 4 - thus explaining the difficulty of lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege, or b) AC^0[p]-Frege cannot efficiently prove the depth d PIT axioms, and hence we have a lower bound on AC^0[p]-Frege. Using the algebraic structure of our proof system, we propose a novel way to extend techniques from algebraic circuit complexity to prove lower bounds in proof complexity

Some Applications of Coding Theory in Computational Complexity

Error-correcting codes and related combinatorial constructs play an important role in several recent (and old) results in computational complexity theory. In this paper we survey results on locally-testable and locally-decodable error-correcting codes, and their applications to complexity theory and to cryptography. Locally decodable codes are error-correcting codes with sub-linear time error-correcting algorithms. They are related to private information retrieval (a type of cryptographic protocol), and they are used in average-case complexity and to construct ``hard-core predicates'' for one-way permutations. Locally testable codes are error-correcting codes with sub-linear time error-detection algorithms, and they are the combinatorial core of probabilistically checkable proofs

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

Efficient Parallel Path Checking for Linear-Time Temporal Logic With Past and Bounds

Path checking, the special case of the model checking problem where the model under consideration is a single path, plays an important role in monitoring, testing, and verification. We prove that for linear-time temporal logic (LTL), path checking can be efficiently parallelized. In addition to the core logic, we consider the extensions of LTL with bounded-future (BLTL) and past-time (LTL+Past) operators. Even though both extensions improve the succinctness of the logic exponentially, path checking remains efficiently parallelizable: Our algorithm for LTL, LTL+Past, and BLTL+Past is in AC^1(logDCFL) \subseteq NC

Discovering the roots: Uniform closure results for algebraic classes under factoring

Newton iteration (NI) is an almost 350 years old recursive formula that approximates a simple root of a polynomial quite rapidly. We generalize it to a matrix recurrence (allRootsNI) that approximates all the roots simultaneously. In this form, the process yields a better circuit complexity in the case when the number of roots $r$ is small but the multiplicities are exponentially large. Our method sets up a linear system in $r$ unknowns and iteratively builds the roots as formal power series. For an algebraic circuit $f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ of size $s$ we prove that each factor has size at most a polynomial in: $s$ and the degree of the squarefree part of $f$. Consequently, if $f_1$ is a $2^{\Omega(n)}$-hard polynomial then any nonzero multiple $\prod_{i} f_i^{e_i}$ is equally hard for arbitrary positive $e_i$'s, assuming that $\sum_i \text{deg}(f_i)$ is at most $2^{O(n)}$. It is an old open question whether the class of poly($n$)-sized formulas (resp. algebraic branching programs) is closed under factoring. We show that given a polynomial $f$ of degree $n^{O(1)}$ and formula (resp. ABP) size $n^{O(\log n)}$ we can find a similar size formula (resp. ABP) factor in randomized poly($n^{\log n}$)-time. Consequently, if determinant requires $n^{\Omega(\log n)}$ size formula, then the same can be said about any of its nonzero multiples. As part of our proofs, we identify a new property of multivariate polynomial factorization. We show that under a random linear transformation $\tau$, $f(\tau\overline{x})$ completely factors via power series roots. Moreover, the factorization adapts well to circuit complexity analysis. This with allRootsNI are the techniques that help us make progress towards the old open problems, supplementing the large body of classical results and concepts in algebraic circuit factorization (eg. Zassenhaus, J.NT 1969, Kaltofen, STOC 1985-7 \& Burgisser, FOCS 2001).Comment: 33 Pages, No figure

Non-Malleable Codes for Small-Depth Circuits

We construct efficient, unconditional non-malleable codes that are secure against tampering functions computed by small-depth circuits. For constant-depth circuits of polynomial size (i.e. $\mathsf{AC^0}$ tampering functions), our codes have codeword length $n = k^{1+o(1)}$ for a $k$-bit message. This is an exponential improvement of the previous best construction due to Chattopadhyay and Li (STOC 2017), which had codeword length $2^{O(\sqrt{k})}$. Our construction remains efficient for circuit depths as large as $\Theta(\log(n)/\log\log(n))$ (indeed, our codeword length remains $n\leq k^{1+\epsilon})$, and extending our result beyond this would require separating $\mathsf{P}$ from $\mathsf{NC^1}$. We obtain our codes via a new efficient non-malleable reduction from small-depth tampering to split-state tampering. A novel aspect of our work is the incorporation of techniques from unconditional derandomization into the framework of non-malleable reductions. In particular, a key ingredient in our analysis is a recent pseudorandom switching lemma of Trevisan and Xue (CCC 2013), a derandomization of the influential switching lemma from circuit complexity; the randomness-efficiency of this switching lemma translates into the rate-efficiency of our codes via our non-malleable reduction.Comment: 26 pages, 4 figure