In a Merlin–Arthur proof system, the proof verifier (Arthur) accepts valid proofs (from Merlin) with probability 1, and rejects invalid proofs with probability arbitrarily close to 1. The running time of such a system is defined to be the length of Merlin’s proof plus the running time of Arthur. We provide new Merlin–Arthur proof systems for some key problems in fine-grained complexity. In several cases our proof systems have optimal running time. Our main results include: Certifying that a list of Counting the number of Computing the All-Pairs Shortest Distances matrix for an Certifying that an Certifying a Quantified Boolean Formula is true can be done in Merlin–Arthur time
Due to the centrality of these problems in fine-grained complexity, our results have consequences for many other problems of interest. For example, our work implies that certifying there is no Subset Sum solution to
The quantum simulation of quantum chemistry is a promising application of quantum computers. However, for
- Award ID(s):
- 1747426
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10231543
- Publisher / Repository:
- Nature Publishing Group
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- npj Quantum Information
- Volume:
- 7
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2056-6387
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract n integers has no 3-SUM solution can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$$\tilde{O}(n)$$ $$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ $$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ $$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ k -cliques with total edge weight equal to zero in ann -node graph can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$${\tilde{O}}(n^{\lceil k/2\rceil })$$ $$k\ge 3$$ k , this bound can be further improved for sparse graphs: for example, counting the number of zero-weight triangles in anm -edge graph can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$${\tilde{O}}(m)$$ k -cliques in unweighted graphs, and had worse running times for smallk .n -node graph can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$$\tilde{O}(n^2)$$ $$\Omega (n^2)$$ $$\tilde{O}(n^{2.94})$$ n -variablek -CNF is unsatisfiable can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$$2^{n/2 - n/O(k)}$$ $$2^{n/2}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ $$\#$$ k -UNSAT running in$$2^{n/2}/n^{\omega (1)}$$ $$2^{4n/5}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ $$2^{2n/3}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ n integers can be done in Merlin–Arthur time$$2^{n/3}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ $$2^{0.49991n}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ -
more » « less
A<sc>bstract</sc> In this paper we explore
pp →W ± (ℓ ± ν )γ to$$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^2\right) $$ $$ \mathcal{O}\left({E}^4/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ W ± → ℓ ± ν , making the calculation actually$$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {\ell}^{\pm}\nu \gamma $$ $$ \left({L}^{\dagger }{\overline{\sigma}}^{\mu }{\tau}^IL\right)\left({Q}^{\dagger }{\overline{\sigma}}^{\nu }{\tau}^IQ\right) $$ B μν , which contribute to$$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {\ell}^{\pm}\nu \gamma $$ $$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {W}^{\pm}\gamma $$ -
more » « less
Abstract Approximate integer programming is the following: For a given convex body
$$K \subseteq {\mathbb {R}}^n$$ $$K \cap {\mathbb {Z}}^n$$ $$2\cdot (K - c) +c$$ K , scaled by 2 from its center of gravityc . Approximate integer programming can be solved in time$$2^{O(n)}$$ $$2^{O(n)} \cdot n^n$$ $$x^* \in (K \cap {\mathbb {Z}}^n)$$ $$2^{O(n)}$$ remainders of each component$$x_i^* \mod \ell $$ $$\ell \ge 5(n+1)$$ $$x^*$$ cutting-plane technique , iteratively halving the volume of the feasible set. The cutting planes are determined via approximate integer programming. Enumeration of the possible remainders gives a$$2^{O(n)}n^n$$ asymmetric approximate Carathéodory theorem that might be of interest on its own. Our second method concerns integer programming problems in equation-standard form$$Ax = b, 0 \le x \le u, \, x \in {\mathbb {Z}}^n$$ $$\prod _i O(\log u_i +1)$$ knapsack orsubset-sum problems withpolynomial variable range $$0 \le x_i \le p(n)$$ $$(\log n)^{O(n)}$$ $$n^n \cdot 2^{O(n)}$$ -
more » « less
Abstract We continue the program of proving circuit lower bounds via circuit satisfiability algorithms. So far, this program has yielded several concrete results, proving that functions in
$\mathsf {Quasi}\text {-}\mathsf {NP} = \mathsf {NTIME}[n^{(\log n)^{O(1)}}]$ $\mathcal { C}$ $\mathcal { C}$ # SAT algorithms which beat exhaustive search by a minor amount. In this paper, we present a new strong lower bound consequence of having a non-trivial# SAT algorithm for a circuit class${\mathcal C}$ f (x 1,…,x n ) issparse if it outputs 1 onO (1) values of${\sum }_{i} x_{i}$ f , and for all “typical”$\mathcal { C}$ # SAT algorithms for$\mathcal { C}$ $f \circ \mathcal { C}$ stronger than$\mathcal { C}$ # SAT algorithms forn k -size$\mathcal { C}$ n /n k time (for allk ) implyN E X P does not have$(f \circ \mathcal { C})$ # SAT algorithms for$2^{n^{{\varepsilon }}}$ $\mathcal { C}$ $2^{n-n^{{\varepsilon }}}$ ε > 0) implyQ u a s i -N P does not have$(f \circ \mathcal { C})$ Applying
# SAT algorithms from the literature, one immediate corollary of our results is thatQ u a s i -N P does not haveE M A J ∘A C C 0∘T H R circuits of polynomial size, whereE M A J is the “exact majority” function, improving previous lower bounds againstA C C 0[Williams JACM’14] andA C C 0∘T H R [Williams STOC’14], [Murray-Williams STOC’18]. This is the first nontrivial lower bound against such a circuit class. -
more » « less
Abstract Given a compact doubling metric measure space
X that supports a 2-Poincaré inequality, we construct a Dirichlet form on$$N^{1,2}(X)$$ $$N^{1,2}(X)$$ X by a family of graphs that is doubling and supports a 2-Poincaré inequality (see [20]). We construct a bilinear form on$$N^{1,2}(X)$$ $$\Gamma $$ $$\mathcal {E}$$ $$\mathcal {E}$$ X . Properties of$$\mathcal {E}$$ $$\mathcal {E}$$ $$\Omega \subseteq X$$ $$\mathcal {E}$$ X with a prescribed Lipschitz boundary data via a numerical scheme dictated by the approximating Dirichlet forms, which are discrete objects.
