More Like this

1. On Super Strong ETH

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24258-9_28  

   Vyas, N.; Williams, R. (January 2019, Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2019)

   Multiple known algorithmic paradigms (backtracking, local search and the polynomial method) only yield a 2n(1−1/O(k)) time algorithm for k-SAT in the worst case. For this reason, it has been hypothesized that the worst-case k-SAT problem cannot be solved in 2n(1−f(k)/k) time for any unbounded function f. This hypothesis has been called the “Super-Strong ETH”, modeled after the ETH and the Strong ETH. We give two results on the Super-Strong ETH: 1. It has also been hypothesized that k-SAT is hard to solve for randomly chosen instances near the “critical threshold”, where the clause-to-variable ratio is 2^kln2−Θ(1). We give a randomized algorithm which refutes the Super-Strong ETH for the case of random k-SAT and planted k-SAT for any clause-to-variable ratio. For example, given any random k-SAT instance F with n variables and m clauses, our algorithm decides satisfiability for F in 2^n(1−Ω(logk)/k) time, with high probability (over the choice of the formula and the randomness of the algorithm). It turns out that a well-known algorithm from the literature on SAT algorithms does the job: the PPZ algorithm of Paturi, Pudlák and Zane [17]. 2. The Unique k-SAT problem is the special case where there is at most one satisfying assignment. Improving prior reductions, we show that the Super-Strong ETHs for Unique k-SAT and k-SAT are equivalent. More precisely, we show the time complexities of Unique k-SAT and k-SAT are very tightly correlated: if Unique k-SAT is in 2^n(1−f(k)/k) time for an unbounded f, then k-SAT is in 2^n(1−f(k)(1−ε)/k) time for every ε>0. 

   more » « less
2. Local Enumeration and Majority Lower Bounds

   https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2024.17  

   Gurumukhani, Mohit; Paturi, Ramamohan; Pudlák, Pavel; Saks, Michael; Talebanfard, Navid (January 2024, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik)

   Santhanam, Rahul (Ed.)

   Depth-3 circuit lower bounds and k-SAT algorithms are intimately related; the state-of-the-art Σ^k_3-circuit lower bound (Or-And-Or circuits with bottom fan-in at most k) and the k-SAT algorithm of Paturi, Pudlák, Saks, and Zane (J. ACM'05) are based on the same combinatorial theorem regarding k-CNFs. In this paper we define a problem which reveals new interactions between the two, and suggests a concrete approach to significantly stronger circuit lower bounds and improved k-SAT algorithms. For a natural number k and a parameter t, we consider the Enum(k, t) problem defined as follows: given an n-variable k-CNF and an initial assignment α, output all satisfying assignments at Hamming distance t(n) of α, assuming that there are no satisfying assignments of Hamming distance less than t(n) of α. We observe that an upper bound b(n, k, t) on the complexity of Enum(k, t) simultaneously implies depth-3 circuit lower bounds and k-SAT algorithms: - Depth-3 circuits: Any Σ^k_3 circuit computing the Majority function has size at least binom(n,n/2)/b(n, k, n/2). - k-SAT: There exists an algorithm solving k-SAT in time O(∑_{t=1}^{n/2}b(n, k, t)). A simple construction shows that b(n, k, n/2) ≥ 2^{(1 - O(log(k)/k))n}. Thus, matching upper bounds for b(n, k, n/2) would imply a Σ^k_3-circuit lower bound of 2^Ω(log(k)n/k) and a k-SAT upper bound of 2^{(1 - Ω(log(k)/k))n}. The former yields an unrestricted depth-3 lower bound of 2^ω(√n) solving a long standing open problem, and the latter breaks the Super Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis. In this paper, we propose a randomized algorithm for Enum(k, t) and introduce new ideas to analyze it. We demonstrate the power of our ideas by considering the first non-trivial instance of the problem, i.e., Enum(3, n/2). We show that the expected running time of our algorithm is 1.598ⁿ, substantially improving on the trivial bound of 3^{n/2} ≃ 1.732ⁿ. This already improves Σ^3_3 lower bounds for Majority function to 1.251ⁿ. The previous bound was 1.154ⁿ which follows from the work of Håstad, Jukna, and Pudlák (Comput. Complex.'95). By restricting ourselves to monotone CNFs, Enum(k, t) immediately becomes a hypergraph Turán problem. Therefore our techniques might be of independent interest in extremal combinatorics. 

   more » « less
3. On Super Strong ETH

   https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.11859  

   Vyas, Nikhil; Williams, Ryan (January 2021, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research)

   Multiple known algorithmic paradigms (backtracking, local search and the polynomial method) only yield a 2n(1-1/O(k)) time algorithm for k-SAT in the worst case. For this reason, it has been hypothesized that the worst-case k-SAT problem cannot be solved in 2n(1-f(k)/k) time for any unbounded function f. This hypothesis has been called the "Super-Strong ETH", modelled after the ETH and the Strong ETH. It has also been hypothesized that k-SAT is hard to solve for randomly chosen instances near the "critical threshold", where the clause-to-variable ratio is such that randomly chosen instances are satisfiable with probability 1/2. We give a randomized algorithm which refutes the Super-Strong ETH for the case of random k-SAT and planted k-SAT for any clause-to-variable ratio. For example, given any random k-SAT instance F with n variables and m clauses, our algorithm decides satisfiability for F in  2n(1-c*log(k)/k) time with high probability (over the choice of the formula and the randomness of the algorithm). It turns out that a well-known algorithm from the literature on SAT algorithms does the job: the PPZ algorithm of Paturi, Pudlak, and Zane (1999).   The Unique k-SAT problem is the special case where there is at most one satisfying assignment. Improving prior reductions, we show that the Super-Strong ETHs for Unique k-SAT and k-SAT are equivalent. More precisely, we show the time complexities of Unique k-SAT and k-SAT are very tightly correlated: if Unique k-SAT is in  2n(1-f(k)/k) time for an unbounded f, then k-SAT is in 2n(1-f(k)/(2k)) time. 

   more » « less
4. Simple and efficient pseudorandom genera- tors from Gaussian processes.

   Chattopadhyay, Eshan; De, Anindya; Servedio, Rocco (July 2019, Leibniz international proceedings in informatics)

   Abstract We show that a very simple pseudorandom generator fools intersections of k linear threshold functions (LTFs) and arbitrary functions of k LTFs over n-dimensional Gaussian space. The two analyses of our PRG (for intersections versus arbitrary functions of LTFs) are quite different from each other and from previous analyses of PRGs for functions of halfspaces. Our analysis for arbitrary functions of LTFs establishes bounds on the Wasserstein distance between Gaussian random vectors with similar covariance matrices, and combines these bounds with a conversion from Wasserstein distance to "union-of-orthants" distance from [Xi Chen et al., 2014]. Our analysis for intersections of LTFs uses extensions of the classical Sudakov-Fernique type inequalities, which give bounds on the difference between the expectations of the maxima of two Gaussian random vectors with similar covariance matrices. For all values of k, our generator has seed length O(log n) + poly(k) for arbitrary functions of k LTFs and O(log n) + poly(log k) for intersections of k LTFs. The best previous result, due to [Gopalan et al., 2010], only gave such PRGs for arbitrary functions of k LTFs when k=O(log log n) and for intersections of k LTFs when k=O((log n)/(log log n)). Thus our PRG achieves an O(log n) seed length for values of k that are exponentially larger than previous work could achieve. By combining our PRG over Gaussian space with an invariance principle for arbitrary functions of LTFs and with a regularity lemma, we obtain a deterministic algorithm that approximately counts satisfying assignments of arbitrary functions of k general LTFs over {0,1}^n in time poly(n) * 2^{poly(k,1/epsilon)} for all values of k. This algorithm has a poly(n) runtime for k =(log n)^c for some absolute constant c>0, while the previous best poly(n)-time algorithms could only handle k = O(log log n). For intersections of LTFs, by combining these tools with a recent PRG due to [R. O'Donnell et al., 2018], we obtain a deterministic algorithm that can approximately count satisfying assignments of intersections of k general LTFs over {0,1}^n in time poly(n) * 2^{poly(log k, 1/epsilon)}. This algorithm has a poly(n) runtime for k =2^{(log n)^c} for some absolute constant c>0, while the previous best poly(n)-time algorithms for intersections of k LTFs, due to [Gopalan et al., 2010], could only handle k=O((log n)/(log log n)). 

   more » « less
5. Parallel algorithms and concentration bounds for the Lovász Local Lemma via witness-DAGs

   https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611974782.76  

   Haeupler, Bernhard; Harris, David G. (October 2017, ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms)

   The Lovász Local Lemma (LLL) is a cornerstone principle in the probabilistic method of combinatorics, and a seminal algorithm of Moser & Tardos (2010) provides an efficient randomized algorithm to implement it. This algorithm can be parallelized to give an algorithm that uses polynomially many processors and runs in O(log3 n) time, stemming from O(log n) adaptive computations of a maximal independent set (MIS). Chung et al. (2014) developed faster local and parallel algorithms, potentially running in time O (log^2 n), but these algorithms work under significantly more stringent conditions than the LLL. We give a new parallel algorithm that works under essentially the same conditions as the original algorithm of Moser & Tardos but uses only a single MIS computation, thus running in O(log^2 n) time. This conceptually new algorithm also gives a clean combinatorial description of a satisfying assignment which might be of independent interest. Our techniques extend to the deterministic LLL algorithm given by Chandrasekaran et al. (2013) leading to an NC-algorithm running in time O(log^2 n) as well. We also provide improved bounds on the runtimes of the sequential and parallel resampling-based algorithms originally developed by Moser & Tardos. Our bounds extend to any problem instance in which the tighter Shearer LLL criterion is satisfied. We also improve on the analysis of Kolipaka & Szegedy (2011) to give tighter concentration results. 

   more » « less