Results 1  10
of
15
On the complexity of numerical analysis
 IN PROC. 21ST ANN. IEEE CONF. ON COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY (CCC ’06
, 2006
"... We study two quite different approaches to understanding the complexity of fundamental problems in numerical analysis: • The BlumShubSmale model of computation over the reals. • A problem we call the “Generic Task of Numerical Computation, ” which captures an aspect of doing numerical computation ..."
Abstract

Cited by 48 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We study two quite different approaches to understanding the complexity of fundamental problems in numerical analysis: • The BlumShubSmale model of computation over the reals. • A problem we call the “Generic Task of Numerical Computation, ” which captures an aspect of doing numerical computation in floating point, similar to the “long exponent model ” that has been studied in the numerical computing community. We show that both of these approaches hinge on the question of understanding the complexity of the following problem, which we call PosSLP: Given a divisionfree straightline program producing an integer N, decide whether N> 0. • In the BlumShubSmale model, polynomial time computation over the reals (on discrete inputs) is polynomialtime equivalent to PosSLP, when there are only algebraic constants. We conjecture that using transcendental constants provides no additional power, beyond nonuniform reductions to PosSLP, and we present some preliminary results supporting this conjecture. • The Generic Task of Numerical Computation is also polynomialtime equivalent to PosSLP. We prove that PosSLP lies in the counting hierarchy. Combining this with work of Tiwari, we obtain that the Euclidean Traveling Salesman Problem lies in the counting hierarchy – the previous best upper bound for this important problem (in terms of classical complexity classes) being PSPACE. In the course of developing the context for our results on arithmetic circuits, we present some new observations on the complexity of ACIT: the Arithmetic Circuit Identity Testing problem. In particular, we show that if n! is not ultimately easy, then ACIT has subexponential complexity.
TimeSpace Lower Bounds for Satisfiability
 JACM
, 2005
"... We establish the first polynomial timespace lower bounds for satisfiability on general models of computation. We show that for any constant c less than the golden ratio there exists a positive constant d such that no deterministic randomaccess Turing machine can solve satisfiability in time n c an ..."
Abstract

Cited by 25 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We establish the first polynomial timespace lower bounds for satisfiability on general models of computation. We show that for any constant c less than the golden ratio there exists a positive constant d such that no deterministic randomaccess Turing machine can solve satisfiability in time n c and space n d, where d approaches 1 when c does. On conondeterministic instead of deterministic machines, we prove the same for any constant c less than √ 2. Our lower bounds apply to nondeterministic linear time and almost all natural NPcomplete problems known. In fact, they even apply to the class of languages that can be solved on a nondeterministic machine in linear time and space n 1/c. Our proofs follow the paradigm of indirect diagonalization. We also use that paradigm to prove timespace lower bounds for languages higher up in the polynomialtime hierarchy.
On approximate majority and probabilistic time
 in Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity
, 2007
"... We prove new results on the circuit complexity of Approximate Majority, which is the problem of computing Majority of a given bit string whose fraction of 1’s is bounded away from 1/2 (by a constant). We then apply these results to obtain new relationships between probabilistic time, BPTime (t), and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove new results on the circuit complexity of Approximate Majority, which is the problem of computing Majority of a given bit string whose fraction of 1’s is bounded away from 1/2 (by a constant). We then apply these results to obtain new relationships between probabilistic time, BPTime (t), and alternating time, Σ O(1)Time (t). Our main results are the following: 1. We prove that 2 n0.1�size depth3 circuits for Approximate Majority on n bits have bottom fanin Ω(log n). As a corollary we obtain that BPTime (t) �⊆ Σ2Time � o(t 2) � with respect to some oracle. This complements the result that BPTime (t) ⊆ Σ2Time � t 2 · poly log t � with respect to every oracle (Sipser and Gács, STOC ’83; Lautemann, IPL ’83). 2. We prove that Approximate Majority is computable by uniform polynomialsize circuits of depth 3. Prior to our work, the only known polynomialsize depth3 circuits for Approximate Majority were nonuniform (Ajtai, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic ’83). We also prove that BPTime (t) ⊆ Σ3Time (t · poly log t). This complements our results in (1). 3. We prove new lower bounds for solving QSAT 3 ∈ Σ3Time (n · poly log n) on probabilistic computational models. In particular, we prove that solving QSAT 3 requires time n 1+Ω(1) on Turing machines with a randomaccess input tape and a sequentialaccess work tape that is initialized with random bits. No lower bound was previously known on this model (for a function computable in linear space). ∗ Author supported by NSF grant CCR0324906. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
TimeSpace Lower Bounds for the PolynomialTime Hierarchy on Randomized Machines
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 2006
"... We establish the first polynomialstrength timespace lower bounds for problems in the lineartime hierarchy on randomized machines with twosided error. We show that for any integer ℓ> 1 and constant c < ℓ, there exists a positive constant d such that QSAT ℓ cannot be computed by such machines in ti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 15 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We establish the first polynomialstrength timespace lower bounds for problems in the lineartime hierarchy on randomized machines with twosided error. We show that for any integer ℓ> 1 and constant c < ℓ, there exists a positive constant d such that QSAT ℓ cannot be computed by such machines in time n c and space n d, where QSAT ℓ denotes the problem of deciding the validity of a quantified Boolean formula with at most ℓ − 1 quantifier alternations. Moreover, d approaches 1/2 from below as c approaches 1 from above for ℓ = 2, and d approaches 1 from below as c approaches 1 from above for ℓ ≥ 3. In fact, we establish the stronger result that for any constants a ≤ 1 and c < 1+(ℓ −1)a, there exists a positive constant d such that lineartime alternating machines using space n a and ℓ − 1 alternations cannot be simulated by randomized machines with twosided error running in time n c and space n d, where d approaches a/2 from below as c approaches 1 from above for ℓ = 2 and d approaches a from below as c approaches 1 from above for ℓ ≥ 3. Corresponding to ℓ = 1, we prove that there exists a positive constant d such that the set of Boolean tautologies cannot be decided by a randomized machine with onesided error in time n 1.759 and space n d. As a corollary, this gives the same lower bound for satisfiability on deterministic machines, improving on the previously best known such result. 1
Amplifying lower bounds by means of selfreducibility
 In IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity
, 2008
"... We observe that many important computational problems in NC 1 share a simple selfreducibility property. We then show that, for any problem A having this selfreducibility property, A has polynomial size TC 0 circuits if and only if it has TC 0 circuits of size n 1+ɛ for every ɛ>0 (counting the numb ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We observe that many important computational problems in NC 1 share a simple selfreducibility property. We then show that, for any problem A having this selfreducibility property, A has polynomial size TC 0 circuits if and only if it has TC 0 circuits of size n 1+ɛ for every ɛ>0 (counting the number of wires in a circuit as the size of the circuit). As an example of what this observation yields, consider the Boolean Formula Evaluation problem (BFE), which is complete for NC 1 and has the selfreducibility property. It follows from a lower bound of Impagliazzo, Paturi, and Saks, that BFE requires depth d TC 0 circuits of size n 1+ɛd. If one were able to improve this lower bound to show that there is some constant ɛ>0 such that every TC 0 circuit family recognizing BFE has size n 1+ɛ, then it would follow that TC 0 ̸ = NC 1. We show that proving lower bounds of the form n 1+ɛ is not ruled out by the Natural Proof framework of Razborov and Rudich and hence there is currently no known barrier for separating classes such as ACC 0,TC 0 and NC 1 via existing “natural ” approaches to proving circuit lower bounds. We also show that problems with small uniform constantdepth circuits have algorithms that simultaneously have small space and time bounds. We then make use of known timespace tradeoff lower bounds to show that SAT requires uniform depth d TC 0 and AC 0 [6] circuits of size n 1+c for some constant c depending on d. 1
A Survey of Lower Bounds for Satisfiability and Related Problems
 Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science
, 2007
"... Ever since the fundamental work of Cook from 1971, satisfiability has been recognized as a central problem in computational complexity. It is widely believed to be intractable, and yet till recently even a lineartime, logarithmicspace algorithm for satisfiability was not ruled out. In 1997 Fortnow ..."
Abstract

Cited by 12 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Ever since the fundamental work of Cook from 1971, satisfiability has been recognized as a central problem in computational complexity. It is widely believed to be intractable, and yet till recently even a lineartime, logarithmicspace algorithm for satisfiability was not ruled out. In 1997 Fortnow, building on earlier work by Kannan, ruled out such an algorithm. Since then there has been a significant amount of progress giving nontrivial lower bounds on the computational complexity of satisfiability. In this article we survey the known lower bounds for the time and space complexity of satisfiability and closely related problems on deterministic, randomized, and quantum models with random access. We discuss the stateoftheart results and present the underlying arguments in a unified framework. 1
TimeSpace Tradeoffs for Counting NP Solutions Modulo Integers
 In Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity
, 2007
"... We prove the first timespace tradeoffs for counting the number of solutions to an NP problem modulo small integers, and also improve upon known timespace tradeoffs for Sat. Let m> 0 be an integer, and define MODmSat to be the problem of determining if a given Boolean formula has exactly km satisf ..."
Abstract

Cited by 11 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove the first timespace tradeoffs for counting the number of solutions to an NP problem modulo small integers, and also improve upon known timespace tradeoffs for Sat. Let m> 0 be an integer, and define MODmSat to be the problem of determining if a given Boolean formula has exactly km satisfying assignments, for some integer k. We show for all primes p except for possibly one of them, and for all c < 2cos(π/7) ≈ 1.801, there is a d> 0 such that MODpSat is not solvable in n c time and n d space by general algorithms. That is, there is at most one prime p that does not satisfy the tradeoff. We prove that the same limitation holds for Sat and MOD6Sat, as well as MODmSat for any composite m that is not a prime power. Our main tool is a general method for rapidly simulating deterministic computations with restricted space, by counting the number of solutions to NP predicates modulo integers. The simulation converts an ordinary algorithm into a “canonical ” one that consumes roughly the same amount of time and space, yet canonical algorithms have nice properties suitable for counting.
Minimizing DNF Formulas and AC^0 Circuits Given a Truth Table
 IN PROCEEDINGS OF THE 21ST ANNUAL IEEE CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY
, 2006
"... For circuit classes R, the fundamental computational problem MinR asks for the minimum Rsize of a Boolean function presented as a truth table. Prominent examples of this problem include MinDNF, which asks whether a given Boolean function presented as a truth table has a kterm DNF, and MinCircu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 10 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
For circuit classes R, the fundamental computational problem MinR asks for the minimum Rsize of a Boolean function presented as a truth table. Prominent examples of this problem include MinDNF, which asks whether a given Boolean function presented as a truth table has a kterm DNF, and MinCircuit (also called MCSP), which asks whether a Boolean function presented as a truth table has a size k Boolean circuit. We present a new reduction proving that MinDNF is NPcomplete. It is significantly simpler than the known reduction of Masek [30], which is from CircuitSAT. We then give a more complex reduction, yielding the result that MinDNF cannot be approximated to within a factor smaller than (logN) γ, for some constant γ> 0, assuming that NP is not contained in quasipolynomial time. The standard greedy algorithm for Set Cover is often used in practice to approximate MinDNF. The question of whether MinDNF can be approximated to within a factor of o(logN) remains open, but we construct an instance of MinDNF on which the solution produced by the greedy algorithm is Ω(logN) larger than optimal. Finally, we turn to the question of approximating circuit size for slightly more general classes of circuits. DNF formulas are depth two circuits of AND and OR gates. Depth d circuits are denoted by AC0 d. We show that it is hard to approximate the size of AC0 d circuits (for large enough d) under cryptographic assumptions.
A quantum timespace lower bound for the counting hierarchy
, 2007
"... We obtain the first nontrivial timespace lower bound for quantum algorithms solving problems related to satisfiability. Our bound applies to MajSAT and MajMajSAT, which are complete problems for the first and second levels of the counting hierarchy, respectively. We prove that for every real d and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We obtain the first nontrivial timespace lower bound for quantum algorithms solving problems related to satisfiability. Our bound applies to MajSAT and MajMajSAT, which are complete problems for the first and second levels of the counting hierarchy, respectively. We prove that for every real d and every positive real ǫ there exists a real c> 1 such that either: • MajMajSAT does not have a quantum algorithm with bounded twosided error that runs in time n c, or • MajSAT does not have a quantum algorithm with bounded twosided error that runs in time n d and space n 1−ǫ. In particular, MajMajSAT cannot be solved by a quantum algorithm with bounded twosided error running in time n 1+o(1) and space n 1−ǫ for any ǫ> 0. The key technical novelty is a time and spaceefficient simulation of quantum computations with intermediate measurements by probabilistic machines with unbounded error. We also develop a model that is particularly suitable for the study of general quantum computations with simultaneous time and space bounds. However, our arguments hold for any reasonable uniform model of quantum computation. 1
On probabilistic time versus alternating time
 Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity
, 2005
"... We prove several new results regarding the relationship between probabilistic time, BPTime(t), and alternating time, Σ O(1)Time(t). Our main results are the following: 1. We prove that BPTime(t) ⊆ Σ3Time(t · poly log t). Previous results show that BPTime (t) ⊆ Σ2Time � t 2 · log t � (Sipser and Gá ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove several new results regarding the relationship between probabilistic time, BPTime(t), and alternating time, Σ O(1)Time(t). Our main results are the following: 1. We prove that BPTime(t) ⊆ Σ3Time(t · poly log t). Previous results show that BPTime (t) ⊆ Σ2Time � t 2 · log t � (Sipser and Gács, STOC ’83; Lautemann, IPL ’83) and BPTime(t) ⊆ ΣcTime(t) for a large constant c> 3 (Ajtai, Adv. in Comp. Complexity Theory ’93). 2. We prove that BPTime(t) � ⊆ Σ2Time � o(t 2) � with respect to some oracle. This complements our result (1), and shows that the running time of the SipserGácsLautemann simulation is optimal, up to a log t factor, for relativizing techniques. (All the results in (1) relativize.) This result is obtained as a corollary from a new circuit lower bound for approximate majority: poly(n)size depth3 circuits for approximate majority have bottom fanin Ω(log n). 3. We prove that solving QSAT 3 ∈ Σ3Time(n · poly log n) requires time n 1+Ω(1) on probabilistic Turing machines using space n.9, with random access to input and work tapes, and twoway sequential access to the randombit tape. This is the first lower bound of the form t = n 1+Ω(1) on a model with random access to the input and twoway access to the random bits. 4. We prove that solving QSAT 3 ∈ Σ3Time(n · poly log n) requires time n 1+Ω(1) on Turing machines with an input tape and a sequential work tape that is initialized with random bits. This is the first lower bound on a probabilistic extension of the offline Turing machine model with one work tape.