On the Limits of Depth Reduction at Depth 3 Over Small Finite Fields

Recently, Gupta et.al. [GKKS2013] proved that over Q any $n^{O(1)}$-variate and $n$-degree polynomial in VP can also be computed by a depth three $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit of size $2^{O(\sqrt{n}\log^{3/2}n)}$. Over fixed-size finite fields, Grigoriev and Karpinski proved that any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit that computes $Det_n$ (or $Perm_n$) must be of size $2^{\Omega(n)}$ [GK1998]. In this paper, we prove that over fixed-size finite fields, any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit for computing the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial of $n$ generic matrices of size $n\times n$, must be of size $2^{\Omega(n\log n)}$. The importance of this result is that over fixed-size fields there is no depth reduction technique that can be used to compute all the $n^{O(1)}$-variate and $n$-degree polynomials in VP by depth 3 circuits of size $2^{o(n\log n)}$. The result [GK1998] can only rule out such a possibility for depth 3 circuits of size $2^{o(n)}$. We also give an example of an explicit polynomial ($NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$) in VNP (not known to be in VP), for which any $\Sigma\Pi\Sigma$ circuit computing it (over fixed-size fields) must be of size $2^{\Omega(n\log n)}$. The polynomial we consider is constructed from the combinatorial design. An interesting feature of this result is that we get the first examples of two polynomials (one in VP and one in VNP) such that they have provably stronger circuit size lower bounds than Permanent in a reasonably strong model of computation. Next, we prove that any depth 4 $\Sigma\Pi^{[O(\sqrt{n})]}\Sigma\Pi^{[\sqrt{n}]}$ circuit computing $NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$ (over any field) must be of size $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)}$. To the best of our knowledge, the polynomial $NW_{n,\epsilon}(X)$ is the first example of an explicit polynomial in VNP such that it requires $2^{\Omega(\sqrt{n}\log n)}$ size depth four circuits, but no known matching upper bound

Algebraic properties of Manin matrices 1

We study a class of matrices with noncommutative entries, which were first considered by Yu. I. Manin in 1988 in relation with quantum group theory. They are defined as "noncommutative endomorphisms" of a polynomial algebra. More explicitly their defining conditions read: 1) elements in the same column commute; 2) commutators of the cross terms are equal: $[M_{ij}, M_{kl}] = [M_{kj}, M_{il}]$ (e.g. $[M_{11},M_{22}] = [M_{21},M_{12}]$). The basic claim is that despite noncommutativity many theorems of linear algebra hold true for Manin matrices in a form identical to that of the commutative case. Moreover in some examples the converse is also true. The present paper gives a complete list and detailed proofs of algebraic properties of Manin matrices known up to the moment; many of them are new. In particular we present the formulation in terms of matrix (Leningrad) notations; provide complete proofs that an inverse to a M.m. is again a M.m. and for the Schur formula for the determinant of a block matrix; we generalize the noncommutative Cauchy-Binet formulas discovered recently [arXiv:0809.3516], which includes the classical Capelli and related identities. We also discuss many other properties, such as the Cramer formula for the inverse matrix, the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, Newton and MacMahon-Wronski identities, Plucker relations, Sylvester's theorem, the Lagrange-Desnanot-Lewis Caroll formula, the Weinstein-Aronszajn formula, some multiplicativity properties for the determinant, relations with quasideterminants, calculation of the determinant via Gauss decomposition, conjugation to the second normal (Frobenius) form, and so on and so forth. We refer to [arXiv:0711.2236] for some applications.Comment: 80 page

Arithmetic Circuit Lower Bounds via MaxRank

We introduce the polynomial coefficient matrix and identify maximum rank of this matrix under variable substitution as a complexity measure for multivariate polynomials. We use our techniques to prove super-polynomial lower bounds against several classes of non-multilinear arithmetic circuits. In particular, we obtain the following results : As our main result, we prove that any homogeneous depth-3 circuit for computing the product of $d$ matrices of dimension $n \times n$ requires $\Omega(n^{d-1}/2^d)$ size. This improves the lower bounds by Nisan and Wigderson(1995) when $d=\omega(1)$. There is an explicit polynomial on $n$ variables and degree at most $\frac{n}{2}$ for which any depth-3 circuit $C$ of product dimension at most $\frac{n}{10}$ (dimension of the space of affine forms feeding into each product gate) requires size $2^{\Omega(n)}$. This generalizes the lower bounds against diagonal circuits proved by Saxena(2007). Diagonal circuits are of product dimension 1. We prove a $n^{\Omega(\log n)}$ lower bound on the size of product-sparse formulas. By definition, any multilinear formula is a product-sparse formula. Thus, our result extends the known super-polynomial lower bounds on the size of multilinear formulas by Raz(2006). We prove a $2^{\Omega(n)}$ lower bound on the size of partitioned arithmetic branching programs. This result extends the known exponential lower bound on the size of ordered arithmetic branching programs given by Jansen(2008).Comment: 22 page

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

Explicit polynomial sequences with maximal spaces of partial derivatives and a question of K. Mulmuley

We answer a question of K. Mulmuley: In [Efremenko-Landsberg-Schenck-Weyman] it was shown that the method of shifted partial derivatives cannot be used to separate the padded permanent from the determinant. Mulmuley asked if this "no-go" result could be extended to a model without padding. We prove this is indeed the case using the iterated matrix multiplication polynomial. We also provide several examples of polynomials with maximal space of partial derivatives, including the complete symmetric polynomials. We apply Koszul flattenings to these polynomials to have the first explicit sequence of polynomials with symmetric border rank lower bounds higher than the bounds attainable via partial derivatives.Comment: 18 pages - final version to appear in Theory of Computin

Exponential Time Complexity of the Permanent and the Tutte Polynomial

We show conditional lower bounds for well-studied #P-hard problems: (a) The number of satisfying assignments of a 2-CNF formula with n variables cannot be counted in time exp(o(n)), and the same is true for computing the number of all independent sets in an n-vertex graph. (b) The permanent of an n x n matrix with entries 0 and 1 cannot be computed in time exp(o(n)). (c) The Tutte polynomial of an n-vertex multigraph cannot be computed in time exp(o(n)) at most evaluation points (x,y) in the case of multigraphs, and it cannot be computed in time exp(o(n/polylog n)) in the case of simple graphs. Our lower bounds are relative to (variants of) the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH), which says that the satisfiability of n-variable 3-CNF formulas cannot be decided in time exp(o(n)). We relax this hypothesis by introducing its counting version #ETH, namely that the satisfying assignments cannot be counted in time exp(o(n)). In order to use #ETH for our lower bounds, we transfer the sparsification lemma for d-CNF formulas to the counting setting