272 research outputs found

    An Atypical Survey of Typical-Case Heuristic Algorithms

    Full text link
    Heuristic approaches often do so well that they seem to pretty much always give the right answer. How close can heuristic algorithms get to always giving the right answer, without inducing seismic complexity-theoretic consequences? This article first discusses how a series of results by Berman, Buhrman, Hartmanis, Homer, Longpr\'{e}, Ogiwara, Sch\"{o}ening, and Watanabe, from the early 1970s through the early 1990s, explicitly or implicitly limited how well heuristic algorithms can do on NP-hard problems. In particular, many desirable levels of heuristic success cannot be obtained unless severe, highly unlikely complexity class collapses occur. Second, we survey work initiated by Goldreich and Wigderson, who showed how under plausible assumptions deterministic heuristics for randomized computation can achieve a very high frequency of correctness. Finally, we consider formal ways in which theory can help explain the effectiveness of heuristics that solve NP-hard problems in practice.Comment: This article is currently scheduled to appear in the December 2012 issue of SIGACT New

    Fine-Grained Derandomization: From Problem-Centric to Resource-Centric Complexity

    Get PDF
    We show that popular hardness conjectures about problems from the field of fine-grained complexity theory imply structural results for resource-based complexity classes. Namely, we show that if either k-Orthogonal Vectors or k-CLIQUE requires n^{epsilon k} time, for some constant epsilon>1/2, to count (note that these conjectures are significantly weaker than the usual ones made on these problems) on randomized machines for all but finitely many input lengths, then we have the following derandomizations: - BPP can be decided in polynomial time using only n^alpha random bits on average over any efficient input distribution, for any constant alpha>0 - BPP can be decided in polynomial time with no randomness on average over the uniform distribution This answers an open question of Ball et al. (STOC \u2717) in the positive of whether derandomization can be achieved from conjectures from fine-grained complexity theory. More strongly, these derandomizations improve over all previous ones achieved from worst-case uniform assumptions by succeeding on all but finitely many input lengths. Previously, derandomizations from worst-case uniform assumptions were only know to succeed on infinitely many input lengths. It is specifically the structure and moderate hardness of the k-Orthogonal Vectors and k-CLIQUE problems that makes removing this restriction possible. Via this uniform derandomization, we connect the problem-centric and resource-centric views of complexity theory by showing that exact hardness assumptions about specific problems like k-CLIQUE imply quantitative and qualitative relationships between randomized and deterministic time. This can be either viewed as a barrier to proving some of the main conjectures of fine-grained complexity theory lest we achieve a major breakthrough in unconditional derandomization or, optimistically, as route to attain such derandomizations by working on very concrete and weak conjectures about specific problems

    Tighter Connections between Derandomization and Circuit Lower Bounds

    Get PDF
    We tighten the connections between circuit lower bounds and derandomization for each of the following three types of derandomization: - general derandomization of promiseBPP (connected to Boolean circuits), - derandomization of Polynomial Identity Testing (PIT) over fixed finite fields (connected to arithmetic circuit lower bounds over the same field), and - derandomization of PIT over the integers (connected to arithmetic circuit lower bounds over the integers). We show how to make these connections uniform equivalences, although at the expense of using somewhat less common versions of complexity classes and for a less studied notion of inclusion. Our main results are as follows: 1. We give the first proof that a non-trivial (nondeterministic subexponential-time) algorithm for PIT over a fixed finite field yields arithmetic circuit lower bounds. 2. We get a similar result for the case of PIT over the integers, strengthening a result of Jansen and Santhanam [JS12] (by removing the need for advice). 3. We derive a Boolean circuit lower bound for NEXP intersect coNEXP from the assumption of sufficiently strong non-deterministic derandomization of promiseBPP (without advice), as well as from the assumed existence of an NP-computable non-empty property of Boolean functions useful for proving superpolynomial circuit lower bounds (in the sense of natural proofs of [RR97]); this strengthens the related results of [IKW02]. 4. Finally, we turn all of these implications into equivalences for appropriately defined promise classes and for a notion of robust inclusion/separation (inspired by [FS11]) that lies between the classical "almost everywhere" and "infinitely often" notions

    Average-Case Complexity

    Full text link
    We survey the average-case complexity of problems in NP. We discuss various notions of good-on-average algorithms, and present completeness results due to Impagliazzo and Levin. Such completeness results establish the fact that if a certain specific (but somewhat artificial) NP problem is easy-on-average with respect to the uniform distribution, then all problems in NP are easy-on-average with respect to all samplable distributions. Applying the theory to natural distributional problems remain an outstanding open question. We review some natural distributional problems whose average-case complexity is of particular interest and that do not yet fit into this theory. A major open question whether the existence of hard-on-average problems in NP can be based on the P≠\neqNP assumption or on related worst-case assumptions. We review negative results showing that certain proof techniques cannot prove such a result. While the relation between worst-case and average-case complexity for general NP problems remains open, there has been progress in understanding the relation between different ``degrees'' of average-case complexity. We discuss some of these ``hardness amplification'' results

    Average-Case Hardness of NP and PH from Worst-Case Fine-Grained Assumptions

    Get PDF
    What is a minimal worst-case complexity assumption that implies non-trivial average-case hardness of NP or PH? This question is well motivated by the theory of fine-grained average-case complexity and fine-grained cryptography. In this paper, we show that several standard worst-case complexity assumptions are sufficient to imply non-trivial average-case hardness of NP or PH: - NTIME[n] cannot be solved in quasi-linear time on average if UP ? ? DTIME[2^{O?(?n)}]. - ??TIME[n] cannot be solved in quasi-linear time on average if ?_kSAT cannot be solved in time 2^{O?(?n)} for some constant k. Previously, it was not known if even average-case hardness of ??SAT implies the average-case hardness of ??TIME[n]. - Under the Exponential-Time Hypothesis (ETH), there is no average-case n^{1+?}-time algorithm for NTIME[n] whose running time can be estimated in time n^{1+?} for some constant ? > 0. Our results are given by generalizing the non-black-box worst-case-to-average-case connections presented by Hirahara (STOC 2021) to the settings of fine-grained complexity. To do so, we construct quite efficient complexity-theoretic pseudorandom generators under the assumption that the nondeterministic linear time is easy on average, which may be of independent interest

    Pseudorandomness and the Minimum Circuit Size Problem

    Get PDF
    • …
    corecore