Support-based lower bounds for the positive semidefinite rank of a nonnegative matrix

The positive semidefinite rank of a nonnegative $(m\times n)$-matrix~$S$ is the minimum number~$q$ such that there exist positive semidefinite $(q\times q)$-matrices $A_1,\dots,A_m$, $B_1,\dots,B_n$ such that S(k,\ell) = \mbox{tr}(A_k^* B_\ell). The most important, lower bound technique for nonnegative rank is solely based on the support of the matrix S, i.e., its zero/non-zero pattern. In this paper, we characterize the power of lower bounds on positive semidefinite rank based on solely on the support.Comment: 9 page

Negative weights make adversaries stronger

The quantum adversary method is one of the most successful techniques for proving lower bounds on quantum query complexity. It gives optimal lower bounds for many problems, has application to classical complexity in formula size lower bounds, and is versatile with equivalent formulations in terms of weight schemes, eigenvalues, and Kolmogorov complexity. All these formulations rely on the principle that if an algorithm successfully computes a function then, in particular, it is able to distinguish between inputs which map to different values. We present a stronger version of the adversary method which goes beyond this principle to make explicit use of the stronger condition that the algorithm actually computes the function. This new method, which we call ADV+-, has all the advantages of the old: it is a lower bound on bounded-error quantum query complexity, its square is a lower bound on formula size, and it behaves well with respect to function composition. Moreover ADV+- is always at least as large as the adversary method ADV, and we show an example of a monotone function for which ADV+-(f)=Omega(ADV(f)^1.098). We also give examples showing that ADV+- does not face limitations of ADV like the certificate complexity barrier and the property testing barrier.Comment: 29 pages, v2: added automorphism principle, extended to non-boolean functions, simplified examples, added matching upper bound for AD

The quantum adversary method and classical formula size lower bounds

We introduce two new complexity measures for Boolean functions, or more generally for functions of the form f:S->T. We call these measures sumPI and maxPI. The quantity sumPI has been emerging through a line of research on quantum query complexity lower bounds via the so-called quantum adversary method [Amb02, Amb03, BSS03, Zha04, LM04], culminating in [SS04] with the realization that these many different formulations are in fact equivalent. Given that sumPI turns out to be such a robust invariant of a function, we begin to investigate this quantity in its own right and see that it also has applications to classical complexity theory. As a surprising application we show that sumPI^2(f) is a lower bound on the formula size, and even, up to a constant multiplicative factor, the probabilistic formula size of f. We show that several formula size lower bounds in the literature, specifically Khrapchenko and its extensions [Khr71, Kou93], including a key lemma of [Has98], are in fact special cases of our method. The second quantity we introduce, maxPI(f), is always at least as large as sumPI(f), and is derived from sumPI in such a way that maxPI^2(f) remains a lower bound on formula size. While sumPI(f) is always a lower bound on the quantum query complexity of f, this is not the case in general for maxPI(f). A strong advantage of sumPI(f) is that it has both primal and dual characterizations, and thus it is relatively easy to give both upper and lower bounds on the sumPI complexity of functions. To demonstrate this, we look at a few concrete examples, for three functions: recursive majority of three, a function defined by Ambainis, and the collision problem.Comment: Appears in Conference on Computational Complexity 200