A Ihara-Bass Formula for Non-Boolean Matrices and Strong Refutations of Random CSPs

Authors Tommaso d'Orsi, Luca Trevisan



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.CCC.2023.27.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.67 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Tommaso d'Orsi
  • Department of Computer Science, ETH Zürich, Switzerland
Luca Trevisan
  • Department of Computing Sciences, Bocconi University, Milano, Italy

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Pravesh Kothari for useful discussions about semi-random CSPs.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Tommaso d'Orsi and Luca Trevisan. A Ihara-Bass Formula for Non-Boolean Matrices and Strong Refutations of Random CSPs. In 38th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 264, pp. 27:1-27:16, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2023.27

Abstract

We define a novel notion of "non-backtracking" matrix associated to any symmetric matrix, and we prove a "Ihara-Bass" type formula for it. We use this theory to prove new results on polynomial-time strong refutations of random constraint satisfaction problems with k variables per constraints (k-CSPs). For a random k-CSP instance constructed out of a constraint that is satisfied by a p fraction of assignments, if the instance contains n variables and n^{k/2} / ε² constraints, we can efficiently compute a certificate that the optimum satisfies at most a p+O_k(ε) fraction of constraints. Previously, this was known for even k, but for odd k one needed n^{k/2} (log n)^{O(1)} / ε² random constraints to achieve the same conclusion. Although the improvement is only polylogarithmic, it overcomes a significant barrier to these types of results. Strong refutation results based on current approaches construct a certificate that a certain matrix associated to the k-CSP instance is quasirandom. Such certificate can come from a Feige-Ofek type argument, from an application of Grothendieck’s inequality, or from a spectral bound obtained with a trace argument. The first two approaches require a union bound that cannot work when the number of constraints is o(n^⌈k/2⌉) and the third one cannot work when the number of constraints is o(n^{k/2} √{log n}). We further apply our techniques to obtain a new PTAS finding assignments for k-CSP instances with n^{k/2} / ε² constraints in the semi-random settings where the constraints are random, but the sign patterns are adversarial.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation
  • Mathematics of computing → Probability and statistics
Keywords
  • CSP
  • k-XOR
  • strong refutation
  • sum-of-squares
  • tensor
  • graph
  • hypergraph
  • non-backtracking walk

Metrics

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

References

  1. Vedat Levi Alev, Fernando Granha Jeronimo, and Madhur Tulsiani. Approximating constraint satisfaction problems on high-dimensional expanders. In 2019 IEEE 60th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 180-201. IEEE, 2019. Google Scholar
  2. Sarah R. Allen, Ryan O'Donnell, and David Witmer. How to refute a random CSP. In IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2015, Berkeley, CA, USA, 17-20 October, 2015, pages 689-708, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2015.48.
  3. Boaz Barak, Prasad Raghavendra, and David Steurer. Rounding semidefinite programming hierarchies via global correlation. In 2011 ieee 52nd annual symposium on foundations of computer science, pages 472-481. IEEE, 2011. Google Scholar
  4. Hyman Bass. The Ihara-Selberg zeta function of a tree lattice. International Journal of Mathematics, 3(06):717-797, 1992. Google Scholar
  5. Charles Bordenave, Marc Lelarge, and Laurent Massoulié. Non-backtracking spectrum of random graphs: Community detection and non-regular ramanujan graphs. In IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2015, Berkeley, CA, USA, 17-20 October, 2015, pages 1347-1357, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2015.86.
  6. Siu On Chan. Approximation resistance from pairwise-independent subgroups. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 63(3):1-32, 2016. Google Scholar
  7. Zhou Fan and Andrea Montanari. How well do local algorithms solve semidefinite programs? In Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2017, Montreal, QC, Canada, June 19-23, 2017, pages 604-614. ACM, 2017. Google Scholar
  8. Uriel Feige. Relations between average case complexity and approximation complexity. In STOC 2002, pages 534-543, 2002. Google Scholar
  9. Uriel Feige. Refuting smoothed 3cnf formulas. In 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'07), pages 407-417. IEEE, 2007. Google Scholar
  10. Uriel Feige and Eran Ofek. Spectral techniques applied to sparse random graphs. Random Struct. Algorithms, 27(2):251-275, 2005. Google Scholar
  11. Dimitris Fotakis, Michael Lampis, and Vangelis Th Paschos. Sub-exponential approximation schemes for csps: From dense to almost sparse. arXiv preprint, 2015. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.04391.
  12. Joel Friedman and Andreas Goerdt. Recognizing more unsatisfiable random 3-SAT instances efficiently. In Automata, Languages and Programming, 28th International Colloquium, ICALP 2001, Crete, Greece, July 8-12, 2001, Proceedings, volume 2076 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 310-321. Springer, 2001. Google Scholar
  13. Andreas Goerdt and Michael Krivelevich. Efficient recognition of random unsatisfiable k-SAT instances by spectral methods. In STACS 2001, 18th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, Dresden, Germany, February 15-17, 2001, Proceedings, volume 2010 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 294-304. Springer, 2001. Google Scholar
  14. Venkatesan Guruswami, Pravesh K. Kothari, and Peter Manohar. Algorithms and certificates for boolean CSP refutation: "smoothed is no harder than random". arXiv, 2109.04415, 2021. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.04415.
  15. Venkatesan Guruswami, Pravesh K Kothari, and Peter Manohar. Algorithms and certificates for boolean csp refutation: smoothed is no harder than random. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 678-689, 2022. Google Scholar
  16. Matthew D Horton, HM Stark, and Audrey A Terras. What are zeta functions of graphs and what are they good for? Contemporary Mathematics, 415:173-190, 2006. Google Scholar
  17. Pravesh K. Kothari. Personal communication, 2022. Google Scholar
  18. Dana Moshkovitz and Ran Raz. Two-query pcp with subconstant error. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 57(5):1-29, 2008. Google Scholar
  19. Prasad Raghavendra, Satish Rao, and Tselil Schramm. Strongly refuting random CSPs below the spectral threshold. In Hamed Hatami, Pierre McKenzie, and Valerie King, editors, Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2017, Montreal, QC, Canada, June 19-23, 2017, pages 121-131. ACM, 2017. Google Scholar
  20. Yusuke Watanabe and Kenji Fukumizu. Graph zeta function in the bethe free energy and loopy belief propagation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 22, 2009. Google Scholar
  21. Alexander S. Wein, Ahmed El Alaoui, and Cristopher Moore. The Kikuchi hierarchy and tensor PCA. In 60th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2019, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, November 9-12, 2019, pages 1446-1468, 2019. 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