18,533 research outputs found

    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

    Algorithmic Aspects of Cyclic Combinational Circuit Synthesis

    Get PDF
    Digital circuits are called combinational if they are memoryless: if they have outputs that depend only on the current values of the inputs. Combinational circuits are generally thought of as acyclic (i.e., feed-forward) structures. And yet, cyclic circuits can be combinational. Cycles sometimes occur in designs synthesized from high-level descriptions, as well as in bus-based designs [16]. Feedback in such cases is carefully contrived, typically occurring when functional units are connected in a cyclic topology. Although the premise of cycles in combinational circuits has been accepted, and analysis techniques have been proposed [7], no one has attempted the synthesis of circuits with feedback at the logic level. We have argued the case for a paradigm shift in combinational circuit design [10]. We should no longer think of combinational logic as acyclic in theory or in practice, since most combinational circuits are best designed with cycles. We have proposed a general methodology for the synthesis of multilevel networks with cyclic topologies and incorporated it in a general logic synthesis environment. In trials, benchmark circuits were optimized significantly, with improvements of up to 30%I n the area. In this paper, we discuss algorithmic aspects of cyclic circuit design. We formulate a symbolic framework for analysis based on a divide-and-conquer strategy. Unlike previous approaches, our method does not require ternary-valued simulation. Our analysis for combinationality is tightly coupled with the synthesis phase, in which we assemble a combinational network from smaller combinational components. We discuss the underpinnings of the heuristic search methods and present examples as well as synthesis results for benchmark circuits. In this paper, we discuss algorithmic aspects of cyclic circuit design. We formulate a symbolic framework for analysis based on a divide-and-conquer strategy. Unlike previous approaches, our method does not require ternary-valued simulation. Our analysis for combinationality is tightly coupled with the synthesis phase, in which we assemble a combinational network from smaller combinational components. We discuss the underpinnings of the heuristic search methods and present examples as well as synthesis results for benchmark circuits

    Finite Boolean Algebras for Solid Geometry using Julia's Sparse Arrays

    Full text link
    The goal of this paper is to introduce a new method in computer-aided geometry of solid modeling. We put forth a novel algebraic technique to evaluate any variadic expression between polyhedral d-solids (d = 2, 3) with regularized operators of union, intersection, and difference, i.e., any CSG tree. The result is obtained in three steps: first, by computing an independent set of generators for the d-space partition induced by the input; then, by reducing the solid expression to an equivalent logical formula between Boolean terms made by zeros and ones; and, finally, by evaluating this expression using bitwise operators. This method is implemented in Julia using sparse arrays. The computational evaluation of every possible solid expression, usually denoted as CSG (Constructive Solid Geometry), is reduced to an equivalent logical expression of a finite set algebra over the cells of a space partition, and solved by native bitwise operators.Comment: revised version submitted to Computer-Aided Geometric Desig
    corecore