Search for: All records

We prove several results concerning the communication complexity of a collision-finding problem, each of which has applications to the complexity of cutting-plane proofs, which make inferences based on integer linear inequalities. In particular, we prove an Ω(n^{1−1/k} log k /2^k) lower bound on the k-party number-in-hand communication complexity of collision-finding. This implies a 2^{n^{1−o(1)}} lower bound on the size of tree-like cutting-planes refutations of the bit pigeonhole principle CNFs, which are compact and natural propositional encodings of the negation of the pigeonhole principle, improving on the best previous lower bound of 2^{Ω(√n)}. Using the method of density-restoring partitions, we also extend that previous lower bound to the full range of pigeonhole parameters. Finally, using a refinement of a bottleneck-counting framework of Haken and Cook and Sokolov for DAG-like communication protocols, we give a 2^{Ω(n^{1/4})} lower bound on the size of fully general (not necessarily tree-like) cutting planes refutations of the same bit pigeonhole principle formulas, improving on the best previous lower bound of 2^{Ω(n^{1/8})}. 

We prove several results concerning the communication complexity of a collision-finding problem, each of which has applications to the complexity of cutting-plane proofs, which make inferences based on integer linear inequalities. In particular, we prove an Ω(n^{1-1/k} log k /2^k) lower bound on the k-party number-in-hand communication complexity of collision-finding. This implies a 2^{n^{1-o(1)}} lower bound on the size of tree-like cutting-planes refutations of the bit pigeonhole principle CNFs, which are compact and natural propositional encodings of the negation of the pigeonhole principle, improving on the best previous lower bound of 2^{Ω(√n)}. Using the method of density-restoring partitions, we also extend that previous lower bound to the full range of pigeonhole parameters. Finally, using a refinement of a bottleneck-counting framework of Haken and Cook and Sokolov for DAG-like communication protocols, we give a 2^{Ω(n^{1/4})} lower bound on the size of fully general (not necessarily tree-like) cutting planes refutations of the same bit pigeonhole principle formulas, improving on the best previous lower bound of 2^{Ω(n^{1/8})}. 

We prove an Omega(n^{1−1/k} log k /2^k) lower bound on the k-party number-in-hand communication complexity of collision-finding. This implies a 2^{n^{1−o(1)}} lower bound on the size of tree-like cutting-planes proofs of the bit pigeonhole principle, a compact and natural propositional encoding of the pigeonhole principle, improving on the best previous lower bound of 2^{Omega(sqrt{n})}. 

Cumulative memory—the sum of space used per step over the duration of a computation—is a fine-grained measure of time-space complexity that was introduced to analyze cryptographic applications like password hashing. It is a more accurate cost measure for algorithms that have infrequent spikes in memory usage and are run in environments such as cloud computing that allow dynamic allocation and de-allocation of resources during execution, or when many instances of an algorithm are interleaved in parallel. We prove the first lower bounds on cumulative memory complexity for both sequential classical computation and quantum circuits. Moreover, we develop general paradigms for bounding cumulative memory complexity inspired by the standard paradigms for proving time-space tradeoff lower bounds that can only lower bound the maximum space used during an execution. The resulting lower bounds on cumulative memory that we obtain are just as strong as the best time-space tradeoff lower bounds, which are very often known to be tight. Although previous results for pebbling and random oracle models have yielded time-space tradeoff lower bounds larger than the cumulative memory complexity, our results show that in general computational models such separations cannot follow from known lower bound techniques and are not true for many functions. Among many possible applications of our general methods, we show that any classical sorting algorithm with success probability at least 1/poly(n) requires cumulative memory\(\tilde{\Omega }(n^2) \), any classical matrix multiplication algorithm requires cumulative memoryΩ(n⁶/T), any quantum sorting circuit requires cumulative memoryΩ(n³/T), and any quantum circuit that findskdisjoint collisions in a random function requires cumulative memoryΩ(k³n/T²). 

We prove lower bounds on the time and space required for quantum computers to solve a wide variety of problems involving matrices, many of which have only been analyzed classically in prior work. Using a novel way of applying recording query methods we show that for many linear algebra problems—including matrix-vector product, matrix inversion, matrix multiplication and powering—existing classical time-space tradeoffs also apply to quantum algorithms with at most a constant factor loss. For example, for almost all fixed matrices A, including the discrete Fourier transform (DFT) matrix, we prove that quantum circuits with at most T input queries and S qubits of memory require T=Ω(n^2/S) to compute matrix-vector product Ax for x ∈ {0,1}^n. We similarly prove that matrix multiplication for nxn binary matrices requires T=Ω(n^3/√S). Because many of our lower bounds are matched by deterministic algorithms with the same time and space complexity, our results show that quantum computers cannot provide any asymptotic advantage for these problems at any space bound. We also improve the previous quantum time-space tradeoff lower bounds for n× n Boolean (i.e. AND-OR) matrix multiplication from T=Ω(n^2.5/S^0.5) to T=Ω(n^2.5/S^0.25) which has optimal exponents for the powerful query algorithms to which it applies. Our method also yields improved lower bounds for classical algorithms. 

Cumulative memory – the sum of space used per step over the duration of a computation – is a fine-grained measure of time-space complexity that was introduced to analyze cryptographic applications like password hashing. It is a more accurate cost measure for algorithms that have infrequent spikes in memory usage and are run in environments such as cloud computing that allow dynamic allocation and de-allocation of resources during execution, or when many multiple instances of an algorithm are interleaved in parallel. We prove the first lower bounds on cumulative memory complexity for both sequential classical computation and quantum circuits. Moreover, we develop general paradigms for bounding cumulative memory complexity inspired by the standard paradigms for proving time-space tradeoff lower bounds that can only lower bound the maximum space used during an execution. The resulting lower bounds on cumulative memory that we obtain are just as strong as the best time-space tradeoff lower bounds, which are very often known to be tight. Although previous results for pebbling and random oracle models have yielded time-space tradeoff lower bounds larger than the cumulative memory complexity, our results show that in general computational models such separations cannot follow from known lower bound techniques and are not true for many functions. Among many possible applications of our general methods, we show that any classical sorting algorithm with success probability at least 1/poly(n) requires cumulative memory Ω(n^2), any classical matrix multiplication algorithm requires cumulative memory Ω(n^6/T), any quantum sorting circuit requires cumulative memory Ω(n^3/T), and any quantum circuit that finds k disjoint collisions in a random function requires cumulative memory Ω(k^3 n/T^2). 

Cumulative memory – the sum of space used per step over the duration of a computation – is a fine-grained measure of time-space complexity that was introduced to analyze cryptographic applications like password hashing. It is a more accurate cost measure for algorithms that have infrequent spikes in memory usage and are run in environments such as cloud computing that allow dynamic allocation and de-allocation of resources during execution, or when many multiple instances of an algorithm are interleaved in parallel. We prove the first lower bounds on cumulative memory complexity for both sequential classical computation and quantum circuits. Moreover, we develop general paradigms for bounding cumulative memory complexity inspired by the standard paradigms for proving time-space tradeoff lower bounds that can only lower bound the maximum space used during an execution. The resulting lower bounds on cumulative memory that we obtain are just as strong as the best time-space tradeoff lower bounds, which are very often known to be tight. Although previous results for pebbling and random oracle models have yielded time-space tradeoff lower bounds larger than the cumulative memory complexity, our results show that in general computational models such separations cannot follow from known lower bound techniques and are not true for many functions. Among many possible applications of our general methods, we show that any classical sorting algorithm with success probability at least 1/poly(n) requires cumulative memory Ω(n^2), any classical matrix multiplication algorithm requires cumulative memory Ω(n^6/T), any quantum sorting circuit requires cumulative memory Ω(n^3/T), and any quantum circuit that finds k disjoint collisions in a random function requires cumulative memory Ω(k^3 n/T^2). (Full version of ICALP 2023 paper.) 

Cumulative memory---the sum of space used per step over the duration of a computation---is a fine-grained measure of time-space complexity that was introduced to analyze cryptographic applications like password hashing. It is a more accurate cost measure for algorithms that have infrequent spikes in memory usage and are run in environments such as cloud computing that allow dynamic allocation and de-allocation of resources during execution, or when many multiple instances of an algorithm are interleaved in parallel. We prove the first lower bounds on cumulative memory complexity for both sequential classical computation and quantum circuits. Moreover, we develop general paradigms for bounding cumulative memory complexity inspired by the standard paradigms for proving time-space tradeoff lower bounds that can only lower bound the maximum space used during an execution. The resulting lower bounds on cumulative memory that we obtain are just as strong as the best time-space tradeoff lower bounds, which are very often known to be tight. Although previous results for pebbling and random oracle models have yielded time-space tradeoff lower bounds larger than the cumulative memory complexity, our results show that in general computational models such separations cannot follow from known lower bound techniques and are not true for many functions. Among many possible applications of our general methods, we show that any classical sorting algorithm with success probability at least 1/\poly(n) requires cumulative memory \Omega(n^2), any classical matrix multiplication algorithm requires cumulative memory \Omega(n^6/T) , any quantum sorting circuit requires cumulative memory \Omega(n^3/T) , and any quantum circuit that finds k disjoint collisions in a random function requires cumulative memory \Omega(k^ 3 n/T^2) . 

Query-to-communication lifting theorems, which connect the query complexity of a Boolean function to the communication complexity of an associated “lifted” function obtained by composing the function with many copies of another function known as a gadget, have been instrumental in resolving many open questions in computational complexity. A number of important complexity questions could be resolved if we could make substantial improvements in the input size required for lifting with the Index function, which is a universal gadget for lifting, from its current near-linear size down to polylogarithmic in the number of inputs N of the original function or, ideally, constant. The near-linear size bound was recently shown by Lovett, Meka, Mertz, Pitassi and Zhang [20] using a recent breakthrough improvement on the Sunflower Lemma to show that a certain graph associated with an Index function of that size is a disperser. They also stated a conjecture about the Index function that is essential for further improvements in the size required for lifting with Index using current techniques. In this paper we prove the following; - The conjecture of Lovett et al. is false when the size of the Index gadget is less than logarithmic in N . - The same limitation applies to the Inner-Product function. More precisely, the Inner-Product function, which is known to satisfy the disperser property at size O(log N ), also does not have this property when its size is less than log N . - Notwithstanding the above, we prove a lifting theorem that applies to Index gadgets of any size at least 4 and yields lower bounds for a restricted class of communication protocols in which one of the players is limited to sending parities of its inputs. - Using a modification of the same idea with improved lifting parameters we derive a strong lifting theorem from decision tree size to parity decision tree size. We use this, in turn, to derive a general lifting theorem in proof complexity from tree-resolution size to tree-like Res(⊕) refutation size, which yields many new exponential lower bounds on such proofs. 

Query-to-communication lifting theorems, which connect the query complexity of a Boolean function to the communication complexity of an associated ‘lifted’ function obtained by composing the function with many copies of another function known as a gadget, have been instrumental in resolving many open questions in computational complexity. A number of important complexity questions could be resolved if we could make substantial improvements in the input size required for lifting with the Index function, which is a universal gadget for lifting, from its current near-linear size down to polylogarithmic in the number of inputs N of the original function or, ideally, constant. The near-linear size bound was recently shown by Lovett, Meka, Mertz, Pitassi and Zhang using a recent breakthrough improvement on the Sunflower Lemma to show that a certain graph associated with an Index function of that size is a disperser. They also stated a conjecture about the Index function that is essential for further improvements in the size required for lifting with Index using current techniques. In this paper we prove the following; • The conjecture of Lovett et al. is false when the size of the Index gadget is less than logarithmic in N. • The same limitation applies to the Inner-Product function. More precisely, the Inner-Product function, which is known to satisfy the disperser property at size O(log N), also does not have this property when its size is less than log N. • Notwithstanding the above, we prove a lifting theorem that applies to Index gadgets of any size at least 4 and yields lower bounds for a restricted class of communication protocols in which one of the players is limited to sending parities of its inputs. • Using a modification of the same idea with improved lifting parameters we derive a strong lifting theorem from decision tree size to parity decision tree size. We use this, in turn, to derive a general lifting theorem in proof complexity from tree-resolution size to tree-like Res(⊕) refutation size, which yields many new exponential lower bounds on such proofs.