Results 1  10
of
34
Decoding Reed Solomon Codes beyond the ErrorCorrection Bound
, 1997
"... We present a randomized algorithm which takes as input n distinct points f(xi; yi)g n i=1 from F \Theta F (where F is a field) and integer parameters t and d and returns a list of all univariate polynomials f over F in the variable x of degree at most d which agree with the given set of points in a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 221 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a randomized algorithm which takes as input n distinct points f(xi; yi)g n i=1 from F \Theta F (where F is a field) and integer parameters t and d and returns a list of all univariate polynomials f over F in the variable x of degree at most d which agree with the given set of points in at least t places (i.e., yi = f (xi) for at least t values of i), provided t = \Omega (
Pseudorandom generators without the XOR Lemma
, 1998
"... Madhu Sudan y Luca Trevisan z Salil Vadhan x Abstract Impagliazzo and Wigderson [IW97] have recently shown that if there exists a decision problem solvable in time 2 O(n) and having circuit complexity 2 n) (for all but finitely many n) then P = BPP. This result is a culmination of a serie ..."
Abstract

Cited by 128 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Madhu Sudan y Luca Trevisan z Salil Vadhan x Abstract Impagliazzo and Wigderson [IW97] have recently shown that if there exists a decision problem solvable in time 2 O(n) and having circuit complexity 2 n) (for all but finitely many n) then P = BPP. This result is a culmination of a series of works showing connections between the existence of hard predicates and the existence of good pseudorandom generators. The construction of Impagliazzo and Wigderson goes through three phases of "hardness amplification" (a multivariate polynomial encoding, a first derandomized XOR Lemma, and a second derandomized XOR Lemma) that are composed with the Nisan Wigderson [NW94] generator. In this paper we present two different approaches to proving the main result of Impagliazzo and Wigderson. In developing each approach, we introduce new techniques and prove new results that could be useful in future improvements and/or applications of hardnessrandomness tradeoffs. Our first result is that when (a modified version of) the NisanWigderson generator construction is applied with a "mildly" hard predicate, the result is a generator that produces a distribution indistinguishable from having large minentropy. An extractor can then be used to produce a distribution computationally indistinguishable from uniform. This is the first construction of a pseudorandom generator that works with a mildly hard predicate without doing hardness amplification. We then show that in the ImpagliazzoWigderson construction only the first hardnessamplification phase (encoding with multivariate polynomial) is necessary, since it already gives the required averagecase hardness. We prove this result by (i) establishing a connection between the hardnessamplification problem and a listdecoding...
Efficient Checking of Polynomials and Proofs and the Hardness of Approximation Problems
, 1992
"... The definition of the class NP [Coo71, Lev73] highlights the problem of verification of proofs as one of central interest to theoretical computer science. Recent efforts have shown that the efficiency of the verification can be greatly improved by allowing the verifier access to random bits and acce ..."
Abstract

Cited by 66 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The definition of the class NP [Coo71, Lev73] highlights the problem of verification of proofs as one of central interest to theoretical computer science. Recent efforts have shown that the efficiency of the verification can be greatly improved by allowing the verifier access to random bits and accepting probabilistic guarantees from the verifier [BFL91, BFLS91, FGL + 91, AS92]. We improve upon the efficiency of the proof systems developed above and obtain proofs which can be verified probabilistically by examining only a constant number of (randomly chosen) bits of the proof. The efficiently verifiable proofs constructed here rely on the structural properties of lowdegree polynomials. We explore the properties of these functions by examining some simple and basic questions about them. We consider questions of the form: • (testing) Given an oracle for a function f, is f close to a lowdegree polynomial? • (correcting) Let f be close to a lowdegree polynomial g, is it possible to efficiently reconstruct the value of g on any given input using an oracle for f? 2 The questions described above have been raised before in the context of coding theory as the problems of errordetecting and errorcorrecting of codes. More recently
Extracting randomness from samplable distributions
 In Proceedings of the 41st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
, 2000
"... The standard notion of a randomness extractor is a procedure which converts any weak source of randomness into an almost uniform distribution. The conversion necessarily uses a small amount of pure randomness, which can be eliminated by complete enumeration in some, but not all, applications. Here, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 59 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The standard notion of a randomness extractor is a procedure which converts any weak source of randomness into an almost uniform distribution. The conversion necessarily uses a small amount of pure randomness, which can be eliminated by complete enumeration in some, but not all, applications. Here, we consider the problem of deterministically converting a weak source of randomness into an almost uniform distribution. Previously, deterministic extraction procedures were known only for sources satisfying strong independence requirements. In this paper, we look at sources which are samplable, i.e. can be generated by an efficient sampling algorithm. We seek an efficient deterministic procedure that, given a sample from any samplable distribution of sufficiently large minentropy, gives an almost uniformly distributed output. We explore the conditions under which such deterministic extractors exist. We observe that no deterministic extractor exists if the sampler is allowed to use more computational resources than the extractor. On the other hand, if the extractor is allowed (polynomially) more resources than the sampler, we show that deterministic extraction becomes possible. This is true unconditionally in the nonuniform setting (i.e., when the extractor can be computed by a small circuit), and (necessarily) relies on complexity assumptions in the uniform setting. One of our uniform constructions is as follows: assuming that there are problems in���ÌÁÅ�ÇÒthat are not solvable by subexponentialsize circuits with¦� gates, there is an efficient extractor that transforms any samplable distribution of lengthÒand minentropy Ò into an output distribution of length ÇÒ, whereis any sufficiently small constant. The running time of the extractor is polynomial inÒand the circuit complexity of the sampler. These extractors are based on a connection be
A deterministic strongly polynomial algorithm for matrix scaling and approximate permanents
"... ..."
Using Nondeterminism to Amplify Hardness
, 2004
"... We revisit the problem of hardness amplification in N P, as recently studied by O’Donnell (STOC ‘02). We prove that if N P has a balanced function f such that any circuit of size s(n) fails to compute f on a 1 / poly(n) fraction of inputs, then N P has a function f ′ such that any circuit of size s ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We revisit the problem of hardness amplification in N P, as recently studied by O’Donnell (STOC ‘02). We prove that if N P has a balanced function f such that any circuit of size s(n) fails to compute f on a 1 / poly(n) fraction of inputs, then N P has a function f ′ such that any circuit of size s ′ (n) = s ( √ n) Ω(1) fails to compute f ′ on a 1/2−1/s ′ (n) fraction of inputs. In particular, 1. If s(n) = n ω(1) , we amplify to hardness 1/2 − 1/n ω(1). 2. If s(n) = 2 nΩ(1), we amplify to hardness 1/2−1/2 nΩ(1) 3. If s(n) = 2 Ω(n) , we amplify to hardness 1/2−1/2 Ω( √ n). These improve the results of O’Donnell, which only amplified to 1/2 − 1 / √ n. O’Donnell also proved that no construction of a certain general form could amplify beyond 1/2 − 1/n. We bypass this barrier by using both derandomization and nondeterminism in the construction of f ′. We also prove impossibility results demonstrating that both our use of nondeterminism and the hypothesis that f is balanced are necessary for “blackbox ” hardness amplification procedures (such as ours).
A Uniform Circuit Lower Bound for the Permanent
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 1994
"... We show that uniform families of ACC circuits of subexponential size cannot compute the permanent function. This also implies similar lower bounds for certain sets in PP. This is one of the very few examples of a lower bound in circuit complexity whose proof hinges on the uniformity condition; it is ..."
Abstract

Cited by 23 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show that uniform families of ACC circuits of subexponential size cannot compute the permanent function. This also implies similar lower bounds for certain sets in PP. This is one of the very few examples of a lower bound in circuit complexity whose proof hinges on the uniformity condition; it is still unknown if there is any set in Ntime #2 n O#1# # that does not have nonuniform ACC circuits.
Adaptive submodularity: Theory and applications in active learning and stochastic optimization
 J. Artificial Intelligence Research
, 2011
"... Many problems in artificial intelligence require adaptively making a sequence of decisions with uncertain outcomes under partial observability. Solving such stochastic optimization problems is a fundamental but notoriously difficult challenge. In this paper, we introduce the concept of adaptive subm ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Many problems in artificial intelligence require adaptively making a sequence of decisions with uncertain outcomes under partial observability. Solving such stochastic optimization problems is a fundamental but notoriously difficult challenge. In this paper, we introduce the concept of adaptive submodularity, generalizing submodular set functions to adaptive policies. We prove that if a problem satisfies this property, a simple adaptive greedy algorithm is guaranteed to be competitive with the optimal policy. In addition to providing performance guarantees for both stochastic maximization and coverage, adaptive submodularity can be exploited to drastically speed up the greedy algorithm by using lazy evaluations. We illustrate the usefulness of the concept by giving several examples of adaptive submodular objectives arising in diverse AI applications including management of sensing resources, viral marketing and active learning. Proving adaptive submodularity for these problems allows us to recover existing results in these applications as special cases, improve approximation guarantees and handle natural generalizations. 1.
Adaptive Submodularity: A New Approach to Active Learning and Stochastic Optimization
"... Solving stochastic optimization problems under partial observability, where one needs to adaptively make decisions with uncertain outcomes, is a fundamental but notoriously difficult challenge. In this paper, we introduce the concept of adaptive submodularity, generalizing submodular set functions t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Solving stochastic optimization problems under partial observability, where one needs to adaptively make decisions with uncertain outcomes, is a fundamental but notoriously difficult challenge. In this paper, we introduce the concept of adaptive submodularity, generalizing submodular set functions to adaptive policies. We prove that if a problem satisfies this property, a simple adaptive greedy algorithm is guaranteed to be competitive with the optimal policy. We illustrate the usefulness of the concept by giving several examples of adaptive submodular objectives arising in diverse applications including sensor placement, viral marketing and poolbased active learning. Proving adaptive submodularity for these problems allows us to recover existing results in these applications as special cases and leads to natural generalizations. 1
On the Hardness of Permanent
, 1999
"... . We prove that if there is a polynomial time algorithm which computes the permanent of a matrix of order n for any inverse polynomial fraction of all inputs, then there is a BPP algorithm computing the permanent for every matrix. It follows that this hypothesis implies P #P = BPP. Our algorithm w ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We prove that if there is a polynomial time algorithm which computes the permanent of a matrix of order n for any inverse polynomial fraction of all inputs, then there is a BPP algorithm computing the permanent for every matrix. It follows that this hypothesis implies P #P = BPP. Our algorithm works over any sufficiently large finite field (polynomially larger than the inverse of the assumed success ratio), or any interval of integers of similar range. The assumed algorithm can also be a probabilistic polynomial time algorithm. Our result is essentially the best possible based on any black box assumption of permanent solvers, and is a simultaneous improvement of the results of Gemmell and Sudan [GS92], Feige and Lund [FL92] as well as Cai and Hemachandra [CH91], and Toda (see [ABG90]). 1 Introduction The permanent of an n \Theta n matrix A is defined as per(A) = X oe2Sn n Y i=1 A i;oe(i) ; where Sn is the symmetric group on n letters, i.e., the set of all permutations of f1;...