Quantified Derandomization of Linear Threshold Circuits

One of the prominent current challenges in complexity theory is the attempt to prove lower bounds for $TC^0$, the class of constant-depth, polynomial-size circuits with majority gates. Relying on the results of Williams (2013), an appealing approach to prove such lower bounds is to construct a non-trivial derandomization algorithm for $TC^0$. In this work we take a first step towards the latter goal, by proving the first positive results regarding the derandomization of $TC^0$ circuits of depth $d>2$. Our first main result is a quantified derandomization algorithm for $TC^0$ circuits with a super-linear number of wires. Specifically, we construct an algorithm that gets as input a $TC^0$ circuit $C$ over $n$ input bits with depth $d$ and $n^{1+\exp(-d)}$ wires, runs in almost-polynomial-time, and distinguishes between the case that $C$ rejects at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs and the case that $C$ accepts at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs. In fact, our algorithm works even when the circuit $C$ is a linear threshold circuit, rather than just a $TC^0$ circuit (i.e., $C$ is a circuit with linear threshold gates, which are stronger than majority gates). Our second main result is that even a modest improvement of our quantified derandomization algorithm would yield a non-trivial algorithm for standard derandomization of all of $TC^0$, and would consequently imply that $NEXP\not\subseteq TC^0$. Specifically, if there exists a quantified derandomization algorithm that gets as input a $TC^0$ circuit with depth $d$ and $n^{1+O(1/d)}$ wires (rather than $n^{1+\exp(-d)}$ wires), runs in time at most $2^{n^{\exp(-d)}}$, and distinguishes between the case that $C$ rejects at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs and the case that $C$ accepts at most $2^{n^{1-1/5d}}$ inputs, then there exists an algorithm with running time $2^{n^{1-\Omega(1)}}$ for standard derandomization of $TC^0$.Comment: Changes in this revision: An additional result (a PRG for quantified derandomization of depth-2 LTF circuits); rewrite of some of the exposition; minor correction

Pseudorandomness for Approximate Counting and Sampling

We study computational procedures that use both randomness and nondeterminism. The goal of this paper is to derandomize such procedures under the weakest possible assumptions. Our main technical contribution allows one to “boost” a given hardness assumption: We show that if there is a problem in EXP that cannot be computed by poly-size nondeterministic circuits then there is one which cannot be computed by poly-size circuits that make non-adaptive NP oracle queries. This in particular shows that the various assumptions used over the last few years by several authors to derandomize Arthur-Merlin games (i.e., show AM = NP) are in fact all equivalent. We also define two new primitives that we regard as the natural pseudorandom objects associated with approximate counting and sampling of NP-witnesses. We use the “boosting” theorem and hashing techniques to construct these primitives using an assumption that is no stronger than that used to derandomize AM. We observe that Cai's proof that S_2^P ⊆ PP⊆(NP) and the learning algorithm of Bshouty et al. can be seen as reductions to sampling that are not probabilistic. As a consequence they can be derandomized under an assumption which is weaker than the assumption that was previously known to suffice

Randomness in completeness and space-bounded computations

The study of computational complexity investigates the role of various computational resources such as processing time, memory requirements, nondeterminism, randomness, nonuniformity, etc. to solve different types of computational problems. In this dissertation, we study the role of randomness in two fundamental areas of computational complexity: NP-completeness and space-bounded computations. The concept of completeness plays an important role in defining the notion of \u27hard\u27 problems in Computer Science. Intuitively, an NP-complete problem captures the difficulty of solving any problem in NP. Polynomial-time reductions are at the heart of defining completeness. However, there is no single notion of reduction; researchers identified various polynomial-time reductions such as many-one reduction, truth-table reduction, Turing reduction, etc. Each such notion of reduction induces a notion of completeness. Finding the relationships among various NP-completeness notions is a significant open problem. Our first result is about the separation of two such polynomial-time completeness notions for NP, namely, Turing completeness and many-one completeness. This is the first result that separates completeness notions for NP under a worst-case hardness hypothesis. Our next result involves a conjecture by Even, Selman, and Yacobi [ESY84,SY82] which states that there do not exist disjoint NP-pairs all of whose separators are NP-hard via Turing reductions. If true, this conjecture implies that a certain kind of probabilistic public-key cryptosystems is not secure. The conjecture is open for 30 years. We provide evidence in support of a variant of this conjecture. We show that if there exist certain secure one-way functions, then the ESY conjecture for the bounded-truth-table reduction holds. Now we turn our attention to space-bounded computations. We investigate probabilistic space-bounded machines that are allowed to access their random bits {\em multiple times}. Our main conceptual contribution here is to establish an interesting connection between derandomization of such probabilistic space-bounded machines and the derandomization of probabilistic time-bounded machines. In particular, we show that if we can derandomize a multipass machine even with a small number of passes over random tape and only O(log^2 n) random bits to deterministic polynomial-time, then BPTIME(n) ⊆ DTIME(2^{o(n)}). Note that if we restrict the number of random bits to O(log n), then we can trivially derandomize the machine to polynomial time. Furthermore, it can be shown that if we restrict the number of passes to O(1), we can still derandomize the machine to polynomial time. Thus our result implies that any extension beyond these trivialities will lead to an unknown derandomization of BPTIME(n). Our final contribution is about the derandomization of probabilistic time-bounded machines under branching program lower bounds. The standard method of derandomizing time-bounded probabilistic machines depends on various circuit lower bounds, which are notoriously hard to prove. We show that the derandomization of low-degree polynomial identity testing, a well-known problem in co-RP, can be obtained under certain branching program lower bounds. Note that branching programs are considered weaker model of computation than the Boolean circuits

An Atypical Survey of Typical-Case Heuristic Algorithms

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

Derandomization with Minimal Memory Footprint

Existing proofs that deduce BPL = ? from circuit lower bounds convert randomized algorithms into deterministic algorithms with large constant overhead in space. We study space-bounded derandomization with minimal footprint, and ask what is the minimal possible space overhead for derandomization. We show that BPSPACE[S] ? DSPACE[c ? S] for c ? 2, assuming space-efficient cryptographic PRGs, and, either: (1) lower bounds against bounded-space algorithms with advice, or: (2) lower bounds against certain uniform compression algorithms. Under additional assumptions regarding the power of catalytic computation, in a new setting of parameters that was not studied before, we are even able to get c ? 1. Our results are constructive: Given a candidate hard function (and a candidate cryptographic PRG) we show how to transform the randomized algorithm into an efficient deterministic one. This follows from new PRGs and targeted PRGs for space-bounded algorithms, which we combine with novel space-efficient evaluation methods. A central ingredient in all our constructions is hardness amplification reductions in logspace-uniform TC?, that were not known before

Succinct Hitting Sets and Barriers to Proving Lower Bounds for Algebraic Circuits

We formalize a framework of algebraically natural lower bounds for algebraic circuits. Just as with the natural proofs notion of Razborov and Rudich (1997) for Boolean circuit lower bounds, our notion of algebraically natural lower bounds captures nearly all lower bound techniques known. However, unlike in the Boolean setting, there has been no concrete evidence demonstrating that this is a barrier to obtaining super-polynomial lower bounds for general algebraic circuits, as there is little understanding whether algebraic circuits are expressive enough to support “cryptography” secure against algebraic circuits. Following a similar result of Williams (2016) in the Boolean setting, we show that the existence of an algebraic natural proofs barrier is equivalent to the existence of succinct derandomization of the polynomial identity testing problem, that is, to the existence of a hitting set for the class of poly(N)-degree poly(N)-size circuits which consists of coefficient vectors of polynomials of polylog(N) degree with polylog(N)-size circuits. Further, we give an explicit universal construction showing that if such a succinct hitting set exists, then our universal construction suffices. Further, we assess the existing literature constructing hitting sets for restricted classes of algebraic circuits and observe that none of them are succinct as given. Yet, we show how to modify some of these constructions to obtain succinct hitting sets. This constitutes the first evidence supporting the existence of an algebraic natural proofs barrier. Our framework is similar to the Geometric Complexity Theory (GCT) program of Mulmuley and Sohoni (2001), except that here we emphasize constructiveness of the proofs while the GCT program emphasizes symmetry. Nevertheless, our succinct hitting sets have relevance to the GCT program as they imply lower bounds for the complexity of the defining equations of polynomials computed by small circuits. A conference version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2017)