362 research outputs found

    Shallow Circuits with High-Powered Inputs

    Get PDF
    A polynomial identity testing algorithm must determine whether an input polynomial (given for instance by an arithmetic circuit) is identically equal to 0. In this paper, we show that a deterministic black-box identity testing algorithm for (high-degree) univariate polynomials would imply a lower bound on the arithmetic complexity of the permanent. The lower bounds that are known to follow from derandomization of (low-degree) multivariate identity testing are weaker. To obtain our lower bound it would be sufficient to derandomize identity testing for polynomials of a very specific norm: sums of products of sparse polynomials with sparse coefficients. This observation leads to new versions of the Shub-Smale tau-conjecture on integer roots of univariate polynomials. In particular, we show that a lower bound for the permanent would follow if one could give a good enough bound on the number of real roots of sums of products of sparse polynomials (Descartes' rule of signs gives such a bound for sparse polynomials and products thereof). In this third version of our paper we show that the same lower bound would follow even if one could only prove a slightly superpolynomial upper bound on the number of real roots. This is a consequence of a new result on reduction to depth 4 for arithmetic circuits which we establish in a companion paper. We also show that an even weaker bound on the number of real roots would suffice to obtain a lower bound on the size of depth 4 circuits computing the permanent.Comment: A few typos correcte

    A Casual Tour Around a Circuit Complexity Bound

    Full text link
    I will discuss the recent proof that the complexity class NEXP (nondeterministic exponential time) lacks nonuniform ACC circuits of polynomial size. The proof will be described from the perspective of someone trying to discover it.Comment: 21 pages, 2 figures. An earlier version appeared in SIGACT News, September 201

    Strong ETH Breaks With Merlin and Arthur: Short Non-Interactive Proofs of Batch Evaluation

    Get PDF
    We present an efficient proof system for Multipoint Arithmetic Circuit Evaluation: for every arithmetic circuit C(x1,,xn)C(x_1,\ldots,x_n) of size ss and degree dd over a field F{\mathbb F}, and any inputs a1,,aKFna_1,\ldots,a_K \in {\mathbb F}^n, \bullet the Prover sends the Verifier the values C(a1),,C(aK)FC(a_1), \ldots, C(a_K) \in {\mathbb F} and a proof of O~(Kd)\tilde{O}(K \cdot d) length, and \bullet the Verifier tosses poly(log(dKF/ε))\textrm{poly}(\log(dK|{\mathbb F}|/\varepsilon)) coins and can check the proof in about O~(K(n+d)+s)\tilde{O}(K \cdot(n + d) + s) time, with probability of error less than ε\varepsilon. For small degree dd, 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 cnc^{n} time (for various c<2c < 2) for the Permanent, #\#Circuit-SAT for all sublinear-depth circuits, counting Hamiltonian cycles, and infeasibility of 00-11 linear programs. In general, the value of any polynomial in Valiant's class VP{\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 22n/3+o(n)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 nk/2+O(1)n^{k/2+O(1)}-time for counting kk-cliques in graphs. We point to some potential future directions for refuting the Nondeterministic Strong ETH.Comment: 17 page

    If VNP Is Hard, Then so Are Equations for It

    Get PDF
    Assuming that the Permanent polynomial requires algebraic circuits of exponential size, we show that the class VNP does not have efficiently computable equations. In other words, any nonzero polynomial that vanishes on the coefficient vectors of all polynomials in the class VNP requires algebraic circuits of super-polynomial size. In a recent work of Chatterjee, Kumar, Ramya, Saptharishi and Tengse (FOCS 2020), it was shown that the subclasses of VP and VNP consisting of polynomials with bounded integer coefficients do have equations with small algebraic circuits. Their work left open the possibility that these results could perhaps be extended to all of VP or VNP. The results in this paper show that assuming the hardness of Permanent, at least for VNP, allowing polynomials with large coefficients does indeed incur a significant blow up in the circuit complexity of equations

    A Superpolynomial Lower Bound on the Size of Uniform Non-constant-depth Threshold Circuits for the Permanent

    Get PDF
    We show that the permanent cannot be computed by DLOGTIME-uniform threshold or arithmetic circuits of depth o(log log n) and polynomial size.Comment: 11 page

    On TC0 Lower Bounds for the Permanent

    Get PDF
    Abstract In this paper we consider the problem of proving lower bounds for the permanent. An ongoing line of research has shown super-polynomial lower bounds for slightly-non-uniform small-depth threshold and arithmetic circuits [All99, KP09, JS11, JS12]. We prove a new parameterized lower bound that includes each of the previous results as sub-cases. Our main result implies that the permanent does not have Boolean threshold circuits of the following kinds
    corecore