Results 1  10
of
61
Monotone Complexity
, 1990
"... We give a general complexity classification scheme for monotone computation, including monotone spacebounded and Turing machine models not previously considered. We propose monotone complexity classes including mAC i , mNC i , mLOGCFL, mBWBP , mL, mNL, mP , mBPP and mNP . We define a simple ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2429 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We give a general complexity classification scheme for monotone computation, including monotone spacebounded and Turing machine models not previously considered. We propose monotone complexity classes including mAC i , mNC i , mLOGCFL, mBWBP , mL, mNL, mP , mBPP and mNP . We define a simple notion of monotone reducibility and exhibit complete problems. This provides a framework for stating existing results and asking new questions. We show that mNL (monotone nondeterministic logspace) is not closed under complementation, in contrast to Immerman's and Szelepcs 'enyi's nonmonotone result [Imm88, Sze87] that NL = coNL; this is a simple extension of the monotone circuit depth lower bound of Karchmer and Wigderson [KW90] for stconnectivity. We also consider mBWBP (monotone bounded width branching programs) and study the question of whether mBWBP is properly contained in mNC 1 , motivated by Barrington's result [Bar89] that BWBP = NC 1 . Although we cannot answer t...
Monotone Circuits for Matching Require Linear Depth
"... We prove that monotone circuits computing the perfect matching function on nvertex graphs require\Omega\Gamma n) depth. This implies an exponential gap between the depth of monotone and nonmonotone circuits. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 73 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove that monotone circuits computing the perfect matching function on nvertex graphs require\Omega\Gamma n) depth. This implies an exponential gap between the depth of monotone and nonmonotone circuits.
Superpolynomial lower bounds for monotone span programs
, 1996
"... In this paper we obtain the first superpolynomial lower bounds for monotone span programs computing explicit functions. The best previous lower bound was Ω(n 5/2) by Beimel, Gál, Paterson [BGP]; our proof exploits a general combinatorial lower bound criterion from that paper. Our lower bounds are ba ..."
Abstract

Cited by 47 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we obtain the first superpolynomial lower bounds for monotone span programs computing explicit functions. The best previous lower bound was Ω(n 5/2) by Beimel, Gál, Paterson [BGP]; our proof exploits a general combinatorial lower bound criterion from that paper. Our lower bounds are based on an analysis of Paleytype bipartite graphs via Weil’s character sum estimates. We prove an n Ω(log n / log log n) lower bound for the size of monotone span programs for the clique problem. Our results give the first superpolynomial lower bounds for linear secret sharing schemes. We demonstrate the surprising power of monotone span programs by exhibiting a function computable in this model in linear size while requiring superpolynomial size monotone circuits and exponential size monotone formulae. We also show that the perfect matching function can be computed by polynomial size (nonmonotone) span programs over arbitrary fields.
Locally decodable codes with 2 queries and polynomial identity testing for depth 3 circuits
 SIAM J. COMPUT
, 2007
"... In this work we study two, seemingly unrelated, notions. Locally decodable codes (LDCs) are codes that allow the recovery of each message bit from a constant number of entries of the codeword. Polynomial identity testing (PIT) is one of the fundamental problems of algebraic complexity: we are given ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this work we study two, seemingly unrelated, notions. Locally decodable codes (LDCs) are codes that allow the recovery of each message bit from a constant number of entries of the codeword. Polynomial identity testing (PIT) is one of the fundamental problems of algebraic complexity: we are given a circuit computing a multivariate polynomial and we have to determine whether the polynomial is identically zero. We improve known results on LDCs and on polynomial identity testing and show a relation between the two notions. In particular we obtain the following results: (1) We show that if E: F n ↦ → F m is a linear LDC with two queries, then m = exp(Ω(n)). Previously this was known only for fields of size ≪ 2 n [O. Goldreich et al., Comput. Complexity, 15 (2006), pp. 263–296]. (2) We show that from every depth 3 arithmetic circuit (ΣΠΣ circuit), C, with a bounded (constant) top fanin that computes the zero polynomial, one can construct an LDC. More formally, assume that C is minimal (no subset of the multiplication gates sums to zero) and simple (no linear function appears in all the multiplication gates). Denote by d the degree of the polynomial computed by C and by r the rank of the linear functions appearing in C. Then we can construct a linear LDC with two queries that encodes messages of length r/polylog(d) by codewords of length O(d). (3) We prove a structural theorem for ΣΠΣ circuits, with a bounded top fanin, that
Reducing Randomness Via Irrational Numbers
 In Proceedings of the TwentyNinth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing
, 1997
"... . We propose a general methodology for testing whether a given polynomial with integer coefficients is identically zero. The methodology evaluates the polynomial at efficiently computable approximations of suitable irrational points. In contrast to the classical technique of DeMillo, Lipton, Schwart ..."
Abstract

Cited by 26 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We propose a general methodology for testing whether a given polynomial with integer coefficients is identically zero. The methodology evaluates the polynomial at efficiently computable approximations of suitable irrational points. In contrast to the classical technique of DeMillo, Lipton, Schwartz, and Zippel, this methodology can decrease the error probability by increasing the precision of the approximations instead of using more random bits. Consequently, randomized algorithms that use the classical technique can generally be improved using the new methodology. To demonstrate the methodology, we discuss two nontrivial applications. The first is to decide whether a graph has a perfect matching in parallel. Our new NC algorithm uses fewer random bits while doing less work than the previously best NC algorithm by Chari, Rohatgi, and Srinivasan. The second application is to test the equality of two multisets of integers. Our new algorithm improves upon the previously best algorithms ...
Checking polynomial identities over any field: Towards a derandomization
 In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing
, 1998
"... We present a Monte Carlo algorithm for testing multivariate polynomial identities over any field using fewer random bits than other methods. To test if a polynomial P (x 1�::: �xn) is zero, our method uses Pn i=1dlog(di +1)erandom bits, where di is the degree of xi in P, to obtain any inverse polyno ..."
Abstract

Cited by 23 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a Monte Carlo algorithm for testing multivariate polynomial identities over any field using fewer random bits than other methods. To test if a polynomial P (x 1�::: �xn) is zero, our method uses Pn i=1dlog(di +1)erandom bits, where di is the degree of xi in P, to obtain any inverse polynomial error in polynomial time. The algorithm applies to polynomials given as a black box or in some implicit representation such as a straightline program. Our method works by evaluating P at truncated formal power series representing square roots of irreducible polynomials over the field. This approach is similar to that of Chen and Kao [CK97], but with the advantage that the techniques are purely algebraic and apply to any field. We also prove a lower bound showing that the number of random bits used by our algorithm is essentially optimal in the blackbox model. 1
Maximum matchings in planar graphs via Gaussian elimination
 ALGORITHMICA
, 2004
"... We present a randomized algorithm for finding maximum matchings in planar graphs in time O(n ω/2), where ω is the exponent of the best known matrix multiplication algorithm. Since ω < 2.38, this algorithm breaks through the O(n 1.5) barrier for the matching problem. This is the first result of t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a randomized algorithm for finding maximum matchings in planar graphs in time O(n ω/2), where ω is the exponent of the best known matrix multiplication algorithm. Since ω < 2.38, this algorithm breaks through the O(n 1.5) barrier for the matching problem. This is the first result of this kind for general planar graphs. We also present an algorithm for generating perfect matchings in planar graphs uniformly at random using O(n ω/2) arithmetic operations. Our algorithms are based on the Gaussian elimination approach to maximum matchings introduced in [1].
Arithmetic Circuits: a survey of recent results and open questions
"... A large class of problems in symbolic computation can be expressed as the task of computing some polynomials; and arithmetic circuits form the most standard model for studying the complexity of such computations. This algebraic model of computation attracted a large amount of research in the last fi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A large class of problems in symbolic computation can be expressed as the task of computing some polynomials; and arithmetic circuits form the most standard model for studying the complexity of such computations. This algebraic model of computation attracted a large amount of research in the last five decades, partially due to its simplicity and elegance. Being a more structured model than Boolean circuits, one could hope that the fundamental problems of theoretical computer science, such as separating P from NP, will be easier to solve for arithmetic circuits. However, in spite of the appearing simplicity and the vast amount of mathematical tools available, no major breakthrough has been seen. In fact, all the fundamental questions are still open for this model as well. Nevertheless, there has been a lot of progress in the area and beautiful results have been found, some in the last few years. As examples we mention the connection between polynomial identity testing and lower bounds of Kabanets and Impagliazzo, the lower bounds of Raz for multilinear formulas, and two new approaches for proving lower bounds: Geometric Complexity Theory and Elusive Functions. The goal of this monograph is to survey the field of arithmetic circuit complexity, focusing mainly on what we find to be the most interesting and accessible research directions. We aim to cover the main results and techniques, with an emphasis on works from the last two decades. In particular, we