Document Open Access Logo

Small Normalized Boolean Circuits for Semi-disjoint Bilinear Forms Require Logarithmic Conjunction-depth

Author Andrzej Lingas

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.CCC.2018.26.pdf
  • Filesize: 381 kB
  • 10 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Circuit complexity
Keywords
  • Boolean circuits
  • semi-disjoint bilinear form
  • Boolean vector convolution
  • Boolean matrix product

Metrics

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

Abstract

We consider normalized Boolean circuits that use binary operations of disjunction and conjunction, and unary negation, with the restriction that negation can be only applied to input variables. We derive a lower bound trade-off between the size of normalized Boolean circuits computing Boolean semi-disjoint bilinear forms and their conjunction-depth (i.e., the maximum number of and-gates on a directed path to an output gate). In particular, we show that any normalized Boolean circuit of at most epsilon log n conjunction-depth computing the n-dimensional Boolean vector convolution has Omega(n^{2-4 epsilon}) and-gates. Analogously, any normalized Boolean circuit of at most epsilon log n conjunction-depth computing the n x n Boolean matrix product has Omega(n^{3-4 epsilon}) and-gates. We complete our lower-bound trade-offs with upper-bound trade-offs of similar form yielded by the known fast algebraic algorithms.

Cite As Get BibTex

Andrzej Lingas. Small Normalized Boolean Circuits for Semi-disjoint Bilinear Forms Require Logarithmic Conjunction-depth. In 33rd Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2018). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 102, pp. 26:1-26:10, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2018) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2018.26

Author Details

Andrzej Lingas
  • Department of Computer Science, Lund University, Box 118, 22100 Lund, Sweden

Funding

  • Lingas, Andrzej: Research supported in part by VR grant 2017-03750.

References

  1. N. Alon and R. B. Boppana. The monotone circuit complexity of boolean functions. Combinatorica, 7(1):1-22, 1987. Google Scholar
  2. A. E. Andreev. On one method of obtaining constructive lower bounds for the monotone circuit size. Algebra and Logics, 26(1):3-26, 1987. Google Scholar
  3. N. Blum. An ω (n^4/3) lower bound on the monotone network complexity of the n-th degree convolution. Theoretical Computer Science, 36:59-69, 1985. Google Scholar
  4. N. Blum. On negations in boolean networks. In Efficient Algorithms, volume 5760 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 18-29. Springer-Verlag, 2009. Google Scholar
  5. J. H. Reif (editor). Synthesis of Parallel Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, 1993. Google Scholar
  6. M. J. Fisher and M. S. Paterson. String-matching and other products. In Proceedings of the 7th SIAM-AMS Complexity of Computation, pages 113-125, 1974. Google Scholar
  7. F. Le Gall. Powers of tensors and fast matrix multiplication. In Proceedings of the 39th International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 296-303. Springer-Verlag, 2014. Google Scholar
  8. M. I. Grinchuk and I. S. Sergeev. Thin circulant matrices and lower bounds on the complexity of some boolean operations. Diskretn. Anal. Issled. Oper., 18:35-53, 2011. Google Scholar
  9. K. Iwama and H. Morizumi. An explicit lower bound of 5n - o(n) for boolean circuits. In Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 353-364. Springer-Verlag, 2002. Google Scholar
  10. O. Lachish and R. Raz. Explicit lower bound of 4.5n - o(n) for boolen circuits. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 399-408. ACM, 2001. Google Scholar
  11. E. A. Lamagna. The complexity of monotone networks for certain bilinear forms, routing problems, sorting, and merging. IEEE Transactions on Computers, c-28(10), 1979. Google Scholar
  12. A. Lingas. Towards an almost quadratic lower bound on the monotone circuit complexity of the boolean convolution. In Theory and Applications of Models of Computation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 401-411. Springer-Verlag, 2017. Google Scholar
  13. K. Mehlhorn and Z. Galil. Monotone switching circuits and boolean matrix product. Computing, 16:99-111, 1976. Google Scholar
  14. M. Paterson. Complexity of monotone networks for boolean matrix product. Theoretical Computer Science, 1(1):13-20, 1975. Google Scholar
  15. N. Pippenger and L.G. Valiant. Shifting graphs and their applications. Journal of the ACM, 23(3):423-432, 1976. Google Scholar
  16. R. Pratt. The power of negative thinking in multiplying boolean matrices. SIAM J. Comput., 4(3):326-330, 1975. Google Scholar
  17. R. Raz. On the complexity of matrix product. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 144-151. ACM, 2002. Google Scholar
  18. A. A. Razborov. Lower bounds on the monotone complexity of some boolean functions. Doklady Akademii Nauk, 281(4):798-801, 1985. Google Scholar
  19. C. P. Schnorr. Zwei lineare untere schranken für die komplexität boolescher funktionen. Computing, 13(2):155-171, 1974. Google Scholar
  20. C. P. Schnorr. A lower bound on the number of additions in monotone computations. Theoretical Computer Science, 2(3):305-315, 1976. Google Scholar
  21. A. Schönhage and V. Strassen. Schnelle multiplikation grober zahlen. Computing, 7:281-292, 1971. Google Scholar
  22. V. Strassen. Gaussian elimination is not optimal. Numerische Mathematik, 13:354-356, 1969. Google Scholar
  23. L.G. Valiant. Negation can be exponentially powerfull. Theoretical Computer Science, 12:303-314, 1980. Google Scholar
  24. I. Wegener. The Complexity of Boolean Functions. Wiley-Teubner Series in Computer Science, New York, Stuggart, 1987. Google Scholar
  25. J. Weiss. An n^3/2 lower bound on the monotone network complexity of the boolean convolution. Information and Control, 59:184-188, 1983. Google Scholar
  26. V. Vassilevska Williams. Multiplying matrices faster than coppersmith-winograd. In Proceedings of the 44th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 807-898. ACM, 2012. Google Scholar
  27. U. Zwick. All pairs shortest paths using bridging sets and rectangular matrix multiplication. Journal of the ACM, 49(3):289-317, 2002. 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
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact