Document Open Access Logo

Depth-3 Circuit Lower Bounds for k-OV

Authors Tameem Choudhury , Karteek Sreenivasaiah

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.STACS.2024.25.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.78 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Circuit complexity
  • Theory of computation → Problems, reductions and completeness
Keywords
  • fine grained complexity
  • k-OV
  • circuit lower bounds
  • depth-3 circuits

Metrics

Abstract

The 2-Orthogonal Vectors (2-OV) problem is the following: given two tuples A and B of n Boolean vectors, each of dimension d, decide if there exist vectors u ∈ A, and v ∈ B, such that u and v are orthogonal. This problem, and its generalization k-OV defined analogously for k tuples, are central problems in the area of fine-grained complexity. One of the major conjectures in fine-grained complexity is that k-OV cannot be solved by a randomised algorithm in n^{k-ε}poly(d) time for any constant ε > 0.
In this paper, we are interested in unconditional lower bounds against k-OV, but for weaker models of computation than the general Turing Machine. In particular, we are interested in circuit lower bounds to computing k-OV by Boolean circuit families of depth 3 of the form OR-AND-OR, or equivalently, a disjunction of CNFs.
We show that for all k ≤ d, any disjunction of t-CNFs computing k-OV requires size Ω((n/t)^k). In particular, when k is a constant, any disjunction of k-CNFs computing k-OV needs to use Ω(n^k) CNFs. This matches the brute-force construction, and for each fixed k > 2, this is the first unconditional Ω(n^k) lower bound against k-OV for a computation model that can compute it in size O(n^k). Our results partially resolve a conjecture by Kane and Williams [Daniel M. Kane and Richard Ryan Williams, 2019] (page 12, conjecture 10) about depth-3 AC⁰ circuits computing 2-OV.
As a secondary result, we show an exponential lower bound on the size of AND∘OR∘AND circuits computing 2-OV when d is very large. Since 2-OV reduces to k-OV by projections trivially, this lower bound works against k-OV as well.

Cite As Get BibTex

Tameem Choudhury and Karteek Sreenivasaiah. Depth-3 Circuit Lower Bounds for k-OV. In 41st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 289, pp. 25:1-25:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2024.25

Author Details

Tameem Choudhury
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, IIT Hyderabad, India
Karteek Sreenivasaiah
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, IIT Hyderabad, India

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for their valuable comments that helped improve the presentation of this paper in several respects.

References

  1. Amir Abboud, Arturs Backurs, and Virginia Vassilevska Williams. Tight hardness results for LCS and other sequence similarity measures. In IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2015, Berkeley, CA, USA, 17-20 October, 2015, pages 59-78. IEEE Computer Society, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2015.14.
  2. Arturs Backurs and Piotr Indyk. Edit distance cannot be computed in strongly subquadratic time (unless SETH is false). In Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM on Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2015, Portland, OR, USA, June 14-17, 2015, pages 51-58. ACM, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2746539.2746612.
  3. Arturs Backurs and Piotr Indyk. Which regular expression patterns are hard to match? In IEEE 57th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2016, 9-11 October 2016, Hyatt Regency, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA, pages 457-466. IEEE Computer Society, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2016.56.
  4. Karl Bringmann. Why walking the dog takes time: Frechet distance has no strongly subquadratic algorithms unless SETH fails. In 55th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2014, Philadelphia, PA, USA, October 18-21, 2014, pages 661-670. IEEE Computer Society, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2014.76.
  5. Karl Bringmann and Wolfgang Mulzer. Approximability of the discrete fréchet distance. J. Comput. Geom., 7(2):46-76, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.20382/jocg.v7i2a4.
  6. Chris Calabro, Russell Impagliazzo, and Ramamohan Paturi. On the exact complexity of evaluating quantified k-cnf. In Parameterized and Exact Computation - 5th International Symposium, IPEC 2010, Chennai, India, December 13-15, 2010. Proceedings, volume 6478 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 50-59. Springer, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17493-3_7.
  7. Lijie Chen and Ryan Williams. An equivalence class for orthogonal vectors. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2019, San Diego, California, USA, January 6-9, 2019, pages 21-40. SIAM, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611975482.2.
  8. Reinhard Diestel. Graph Theory, 4th Edition, volume 173 of Graduate texts in mathematics. Springer, 2012. Google Scholar
  9. Paul Erdös and Richard Rado. Intersection theorems for systems of sets. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, 1(1):85-90, 1960. Google Scholar
  10. Oded Goldreich and Avishay Tal. On constant-depth canonical boolean circuits for computing multilinear functions. In Computational Complexity and Property Testing - On the Interplay Between Randomness and Computation, volume 12050 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 306-325. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43662-9_17.
  11. Oded Goldreich and Avi Wigderson. On the size of depth-three boolean circuits for computing multilinear functions. In Computational Complexity and Property Testing - On the Interplay Between Randomness and Computation, volume 12050 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 41-86. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43662-9_6.
  12. András Hajnal, Wolfgang Maass, Pavel Pudlák, Mario Szegedy, and György Turán. Threshold circuits of bounded depth. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 46(2):129-154, 1993. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0000(93)90001-D.
  13. Johan Håstad. Almost optimal lower bounds for small depth circuits. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, May 28-30, 1986, Berkeley, California, USA, pages 6-20. ACM, 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/12130.12132.
  14. Johan Håstad, Stasys Jukna, and Pavel Pudlák. Top-down lower bounds for depth-three circuits. Computational Complexity, 5(2):99-112, 1995. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01268140.
  15. Russell Impagliazzo and Ramamohan Paturi. On the complexity of k-sat. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 62(2):367-375, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/jcss.2000.1727.
  16. Stasys Jukna. Boolean Function Complexity - Advances and Frontiers, volume 27 of Algorithms and combinatorics. Springer, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24508-4.
  17. Daniel M. Kane and Richard Ryan Williams. The orthogonal vectors conjecture for branching programs and formulas. In 10th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2019, January 10-12, 2019, San Diego, California, USA, volume 124 of LIPIcs, pages 48:1-48:15. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2019.48.
  18. Mauricio Karchmer and Avi Wigderson. Monotone circuits for connectivity require super-logarithmic depth. SIAM J. Discret. Math., 3(2):255-265, 1990. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/0403021.
  19. Dénes Kőnig. Graphen und matrizen. Mat. Fiz. Lapok, 38(10), 1931. Google Scholar
  20. Igor Carboni Oliveira, Rahul Santhanam, and Srikanth Srinivasan. Parity helps to compute majority. In 34th Computational Complexity Conference, CCC 2019, July 18-20, 2019, New Brunswick, NJ, USA, volume 137 of LIPIcs, pages 23:1-23:17. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2019.23.
  21. Alexander A. Razborov. On the method of approximations. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, May 14-17, 1989, Seattle, Washington, USA, pages 167-176. ACM, 1989. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/73007.73023.
  22. Roman Smolensky. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for boolean circuit complexity. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1987, New York, New York, USA, pages 77-82. ACM, 1987. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/28395.28404.
  23. Leslie G. Valiant. Exponential lower bounds for restricted monotone circuits. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 25-27 April, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pages 110-117. ACM, 1983. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/800061.808739.
  24. Ryan Williams. A new algorithm for optimal 2-constraint satisfaction and its implications. Theoretical Computer Science, 348(2-3):357-365, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2005.09.023.
  25. Virginia Vassilevska Williams. On some fine-grained questions in algorithms and complexity. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians: Rio de Janeiro 2018, pages 3447-3487. World Scientific, 2018. Google Scholar
  26. Virginia Vassilevska Williams and Ryan Williams. Subcubic equivalences between path, matrix and triangle problems. In 51th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2010, October 23-26, 2010, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pages 645-654. IEEE Computer Society, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2010.67.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact