Learning circuits with few negations

Monotone Boolean functions, and the monotone Boolean circuits that compute them, have been intensively studied in complexity theory. In this paper we study the structure of Boolean functions in terms of the minimum number of negations in any circuit computing them, a complexity measure that interpolates between monotone functions and the class of all functions. We study this generalization of monotonicity from the vantage point of learning theory, giving near-matching upper and lower bounds on the uniform-distribution learnability of circuits in terms of the number of negations they contain. Our upper bounds are based on a new structural characterization of negation-limited circuits that extends a classical result of A. A. Markov. Our lower bounds, which employ Fourier-analytic tools from hardness amplification, give new results even for circuits with no negations (i.e. monotone functions)

On the meaning of works by V. M. Khrapchenko

Работа содержит обзор результатов основных исследований, выполненных Валерием Михайловичем Храпченко, одним из пионеров отечественной теоретической кибернетики

Learning Circuits with few Negations

Monotone Boolean functions, and the monotone Boolean circuits that compute them, have been intensively studied in complexity theory. In this paper we study the structure of Boolean functions in terms of the minimum number of negations in any circuit computing them, a complexity measure that interpolates between monotone functions and the class of all functions. We study this generalization of monotonicity from the vantage point of learning theory, establishing nearly matching upper and lower bounds on the uniform-distribution learnability of circuits in terms of the number of negations they contain. Our upper bounds are based on a new structural characterization of negation-limited circuits that extends a classical result of A.A. Markov. Our lower bounds, which employ Fourier-analytic tools from hardness amplification, give new results even for circuits with no negations (i.e. monotone functions)

Tight Bounds on Proper Equivalence Query Learning of DNF

We prove a new structural lemma for partial Boolean functions $f$, which we call the seed lemma for DNF. Using the lemma, we give the first subexponential algorithm for proper learning of DNF in Angluin's Equivalence Query (EQ) model. The algorithm has time and query complexity $2^{(\tilde{O}{\sqrt{n}})}$, which is optimal. We also give a new result on certificates for DNF-size, a simple algorithm for properly PAC-learning DNF, and new results on EQ-learning $\log n$-term DNF and decision trees

On the pigeonhole and related principles in deep inference and monotone systems

International audienceWe construct quasipolynomial-size proofs of the propositional pigeonhole principle in the deep inference system KS, addressing an open problem raised in previous works and matching the best known upper bound for the more general class of monotone proofs. We make significant use of monotone formulae computing boolean threshold functions, an idea previously considered in works of Atserias et al. The main construction, monotone proofs witnessing the symmetry of such functions, involves an implementation of merge-sort in the design of proofs in order to tame the structural behaviour of atoms, and so the complexity of normalization. Proof transformations from previous work on atomic flows are then employed to yield appropriate KS proofs. As further results we show that our constructions can be applied to provide quasipolynomial-size KS proofs of the parity principle and the generalized pigeonhole principle. These bounds are inherited for the class of monotone proofs, and we are further able to construct n^O(log log n) -size monotone proofs of the weak pigeonhole principle with (1 + ε)n pigeons and n holes for ε = 1/ polylog n, thereby also improving the best known bounds for monotone proofs

Categorical invariance and structural complexity in human concept learning

An alternative account of human concept learning based on an invariance measure of the categorical\ud stimulus is proposed. The categorical invariance model (CIM) characterizes the degree of structural\ud complexity of a Boolean category as a function of its inherent degree of invariance and its cardinality or\ud size. To do this we introduce a mathematical framework based on the notion of a Boolean differential\ud operator on Boolean categories that generates the degrees of invariance (i.e., logical manifold) of the\ud category in respect to its dimensions. Using this framework, we propose that the structural complexity\ud of a Boolean category is indirectly proportional to its degree of categorical invariance and directly\ud proportional to its cardinality or size. Consequently, complexity and invariance notions are formally\ud unified to account for concept learning difficulty. Beyond developing the above unifying mathematical\ud framework, the CIM is significant in that: (1) it precisely predicts the key learning difficulty ordering of\ud the SHJ [Shepard, R. N., Hovland, C. L.,&Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classifications.\ud Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75(13), 1-42] Boolean category types consisting of three\ud binary dimensions and four positive examples; (2) it is, in general, a good quantitative predictor of the\ud degree of learning difficulty of a large class of categories (in particular, the 41 category types studied\ud by Feldman [Feldman, J. (2000). Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning. Nature,\ud 407, 630-633]); (3) it is, in general, a good quantitative predictor of parity effects for this large class of\ud categories; (4) it does all of the above without free parameters; and (5) it is cognitively plausible (e.g.,\ud cognitively tractable)

Mildly Exponential Lower Bounds on Tolerant Testers for Monotonicity, Unateness, and Juntas

We give the first super-polynomial (in fact, mildly exponential) lower bounds for tolerant testing (equivalently, distance estimation) of monotonicity, unateness, and juntas with a constant separation between the "yes" and "no" cases. Specifically, we give $\bullet$ A $2^{\Omega(n^{1/4}/\sqrt{\varepsilon})}$-query lower bound for non-adaptive, two-sided tolerant monotonicity testers and unateness testers when the "gap" parameter $\varepsilon_2-\varepsilon_1$ is equal to $\varepsilon$, for any $\varepsilon \geq 1/\sqrt{n}$; $\bullet$ A $2^{\Omega(k^{1/2})}$-query lower bound for non-adaptive, two-sided tolerant junta testers when the gap parameter is an absolute constant. In the constant-gap regime no non-trivial prior lower bound was known for monotonicity, the best prior lower bound known for unateness was $\tilde{\Omega}(n^{3/2})$ queries, and the best prior lower bound known for juntas was $\mathrm{poly}(k)$ queries.Comment: 20 pages, 1 figur