<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-22T15:55:36Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="3903" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:3903</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T10:25:54Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>Algebraic and Combinatorial Methods in Computational Complexity (Dagstuhl Seminar 12421)</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Agrawal, Manindra</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Thierauf, Thomas</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Umans, Christopher</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Computational Complexity</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>lower bounds</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>approximazation</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>pseudo-randomness</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>derandomization</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>circuits</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>At its core, much of Computational Complexity is concerned with combinatorial objects and structures. But it has often proven true that the best way to prove&#13;
things about these combinatorial objects is by establishing a connection (perhaps approximate) to a more well-behaved algebraic setting. Indeed, many of the deepest and most powerful results in Computational Complexity rely on&#13;
algebraic proof techniques. The PCP characterization of NP and the&#13;
Agrawal-Kayal-Saxena polynomial-time primality test are two prominent examples.&#13;
&#13;
Recently, there have been some works going in the opposite direction, giving alternative combinatorial proofs for results that were originally proved&#13;
algebraically. These alternative proofs can yield important improvements because they are closer to the underlying problems and avoid the losses in passing to the algebraic setting. A prominent example is Dinur's proof of the PCP Theorem via gap amplification which yielded short PCPs with only a polylogarithmic length blowup (which had been the focus of significant research effort up to that point). We see here (and in a number of recent works) an exciting interplay between algebraic and combinatorial techniques.&#13;
&#13;
&#13;
This seminar aims to capitalize on recent progress and bring together researchers who are using a diverse array of algebraic and combinatorial methods in a variety of settings.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Manindra Agrawal and Thomas Thierauf and Christopher Umans</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2013</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of Dagstuhl Reports, Volume 2, Issue 10 (2013)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>Article</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/DagRep.2.10.60</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-39034</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagRep.2.10.60</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
