Narrow proofs may be maximally long

We prove that there are 3-CNF formulas over n variables that can be refuted in resolution in width w but require resolution proofs of size n(Omega(w)). This shows that the simple counting argument that any formula refutable in width w must have a proof in size n(O(w)) is essentially tight. Moreover, our lower bound generalizes to polynomial calculus resolution and Sherali-Adams, implying that the corresponding size upper bounds in terms of degree and rank are tight as well. The lower bound does not extend all the way to Lasserre, however, since we show that there the formulas we study have proofs of constant rank and size polynomial in both n and w.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Narrow Proofs May Be Maximally Long

We prove that there are 3-CNF formulas over n variables that can be refuted in resolution in width w but require resolution proofs of size n^Omega(w). This shows that the simple counting argument that any formula refutable in width w must have a proof in size n^O(w) is essentially tight. Moreover, our lower bound generalizes to polynomial calculus resolution (PCR) and Sherali-Adams, implying that the corresponding size upper bounds in terms of degree and rank are tight as well. Our results do not extend all the way to Lasserre, however, where the formulas we study have proofs of constant rank and size polynomial in both n and w

A Near-Optimal Depth-Hierarchy Theorem for Small-Depth Multilinear Circuits

We study the size blow-up that is necessary to convert an algebraic circuit of product-depth $\Delta+1$ to one of product-depth $\Delta$ in the multilinear setting. We show that for every positive $\Delta = \Delta(n) = o(\log n/\log \log n),$ there is an explicit multilinear polynomial $P^{(\Delta)}$ on $n$ variables that can be computed by a multilinear formula of product-depth $\Delta+1$ and size $O(n)$, but not by any multilinear circuit of product-depth $\Delta$ and size less than $\exp(n^{\Omega(1/\Delta)})$. This result is tight up to the constant implicit in the double exponent for all $\Delta = o(\log n/\log \log n).$ This strengthens a result of Raz and Yehudayoff (Computational Complexity 2009) who prove a quasipolynomial separation for constant-depth multilinear circuits, and a result of Kayal, Nair and Saha (STACS 2016) who give an exponential separation in the case $\Delta = 1.$ Our separating examples may be viewed as algebraic analogues of variants of the Graph Reachability problem studied by Chen, Oliveira, Servedio and Tan (STOC 2016), who used them to prove lower bounds for constant-depth Boolean circuits

Conditional Lower Bounds for Space/Time Tradeoffs

In recent years much effort has been concentrated towards achieving polynomial time lower bounds on algorithms for solving various well-known problems. A useful technique for showing such lower bounds is to prove them conditionally based on well-studied hardness assumptions such as 3SUM, APSP, SETH, etc. This line of research helps to obtain a better understanding of the complexity inside P. A related question asks to prove conditional space lower bounds on data structures that are constructed to solve certain algorithmic tasks after an initial preprocessing stage. This question received little attention in previous research even though it has potential strong impact. In this paper we address this question and show that surprisingly many of the well-studied hard problems that are known to have conditional polynomial time lower bounds are also hard when concerning space. This hardness is shown as a tradeoff between the space consumed by the data structure and the time needed to answer queries. The tradeoff may be either smooth or admit one or more singularity points. We reveal interesting connections between different space hardness conjectures and present matching upper bounds. We also apply these hardness conjectures to both static and dynamic problems and prove their conditional space hardness. We believe that this novel framework of polynomial space conjectures can play an important role in expressing polynomial space lower bounds of many important algorithmic problems. Moreover, it seems that it can also help in achieving a better understanding of the hardness of their corresponding problems in terms of time