On Black-Box Meta Complexity and Function Inversion

Authors Noam Mazor, Rafael Pass



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.APPROX-RANDOM.2024.66.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.7 MB
  • 12 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Noam Mazor
  • Tel Aviv University, Israel
Rafael Pass
  • Tel Aviv University, Israel
  • Cornell Tech, New York, NY, USA

Cite AsGet BibTex

Noam Mazor and Rafael Pass. On Black-Box Meta Complexity and Function Inversion. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 317, pp. 66:1-66:12, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2024.66

Abstract

The relationships between various meta-complexity problems are not well understood in the worst-case regime, including whether the search version is harder than the decision version, whether the hardness scales with the "threshold", and how the hardness of different meta-complexity problems relate to one another, and to the task of function inversion. In this work, we present resolutions to some of these questions with respect to the black-box analog of these problems. In more detail, let MK^t_M P[s] denote the language consisting of strings x with K_{M}^t(x) < s(|x|), where K_M^t(x) denotes the t-bounded Kolmogorov complexity of x with M as the underlying (Universal) Turing machine, and let search-MK^t_M P[s] denote the search version of the same problem. We show that if for every Universal Turing machine U there exists a 2^{α n}poly(n)-size U-oracle aided circuit deciding MK^t_U P[n-O(1)], then for every function s, and every not necessarily universal Turing machine M, there exists a 2^{α s(n)}poly(n)-size M-oracle aided circuit solving search-MK^t_M P[s(n)]; this in turn yields circuits of roughly the same size for both the Minimum Circuit Size Problem (MCSP), and the function inversion problem, as they can be thought of as instantiating MK^t_M P with particular choices of (a non-universal) TMs M (the circuit emulator for the case of MCSP, and the function evaluation in the case of function inversion). As a corollary of independent interest, we get that the complexity of black-box function inversion is (roughly) the same as the complexity of black-box deciding MK^t_U P[n-O(1)] for any universal TM U; that is, also in the worst-case regime, black-box function inversion is "equivalent" to black-box deciding MK^t_U P.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Computational complexity and cryptography
Keywords
  • Meta Complexity
  • Kolmogorov complexity
  • function inversion

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Gregory J. Chaitin. On the simplicity and speed of programs for computing infinite sets of natural numbers. J. ACM, 16(3):407-422, 1969. Google Scholar
  2. Lijie Chen, Ce Jin, and R Ryan Williams. Hardness magnification for all sparse np languages. In 2019 IEEE 60th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 1240-1255. IEEE, 2019. Google Scholar
  3. Amos Fiat and Moni Naor. Rigorous time/space trade-offs for inverting functions. SIAM Journal on Computing, 29(3):790-803, 2000. Google Scholar
  4. Gudmund Skovbjerg Frandsen and Peter Bro Miltersen. Reviewing bounds on the circuit size of the hardest functions. Information processing letters, 95(2):354-357, 2005. Google Scholar
  5. J. Hartmanis. Generalized kolmogorov complexity and the structure of feasible computations. In 24th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1983), pages 439-445, November 1983. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.1983.21.
  6. Shuichi Hirahara, Rahul Ilango, and Ryan Williams. Beating brute force for compression problems. Technical Report TR23-171, Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, 2023. Google Scholar
  7. Russell Impagliazzo. Relativized separations of worst-case and average-case complexities for np. In 2011 IEEE 26th Annual Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 104-114. IEEE, 2011. Google Scholar
  8. Valentine Kabanets and Jin-yi Cai. Circuit minimization problem. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, May 21-23, 2000, Portland, OR, USA, pages 73-79, 2000. Google Scholar
  9. Ker-I Ko. On the notion of infinite pseudorandom sequences. Theor. Comput. Sci., 48(3):9-33, 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(86)90081-2.
  10. A. N. Kolmogorov. Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. International Journal of Computer Mathematics, 2(1-4):157-168, 1968. Google Scholar
  11. Yanyi Liu and Rafael Pass. On one-way functions and kolmogorov complexity. In 2020 IEEE 61st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 1243-1254. IEEE, 2020. Google Scholar
  12. Yanyi Liu and Rafael Pass. Cryptography from sublinear-time average-case hardness of time-bounded kolmogorov complexity. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 722-735, 2021. Google Scholar
  13. Oleg B Lupanov. On a method of circuit synthesis. Izvestia VUZ, 1:120-140, 1958. Google Scholar
  14. Noam Mazor and Rafael Pass. The non-uniform perebor conjecture for time-bounded kolmogorov complexity is false. 15th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, 2024. Google Scholar
  15. Igor Carboni Oliveira, Ján Pich, and Rahul Santhanam. Hardness magnification near state-of-the-art lower bounds. Theory OF Computing, 17(CCC 2019 Special Issue), 2021. Google Scholar
  16. Igor Carboni Oliveira and Rahul Santhanam. Hardness magnification for natural problems. In 2018 IEEE 59th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 65-76. IEEE, 2018. Google Scholar
  17. Hanlin Ren and Rahul Santhanam. Hardness of kt characterizes parallel cryptography. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2021. Google Scholar
  18. Michael Sipser. A complexity theoretic approach to randomness. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 330-335, 1983. Google Scholar
  19. R.J. Solomonoff. A formal theory of inductive inference. part i. Information and Control, 7(1):1-22, 1964. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(64)90223-2.
  20. Boris A Trakhtenbrot. A survey of russian approaches to perebor (brute-force searches) algorithms. Annals of the History of Computing, 6(4):384-400, 1984. Google Scholar
  21. AC-C Yao. Coherent functions and program checkers. In Proceedings of the twenty-second annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 84-94, 1990. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail