Search for: All records

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)}}]$$\mathrm{Quasi}-\mathrm{NP}=\mathrm{NTIME}\left[n^{{\left(\log n\right)}^{O\left(1\right)}}\right]$and other complexity classes do not have small circuits (in the worst case and/or on average) from various circuit classes$\mathcal { C}$$C$, by showing that$\mathcal { C}$$C$admits non-trivial satisfiability and/or#SAT algorithms which beat exhaustive search by a minor amount. In this paper, we present a new strong lower bound consequence of having a non-trivial#SAT algorithm for a circuit class${\mathcal C}$$C$. Say that a symmetric Boolean functionf(x₁,…,x_n) issparseif it outputs 1 onO(1) values of${\sum }_{i} x_{i}$${\sum }_i{x}_i$. We show that for every sparsef, and for all “typical”$\mathcal { C}$$C$, faster#SAT algorithms for$\mathcal { C}$$C$circuits imply lower bounds against the circuit class$f \circ \mathcal { C}$$f\circ C$, which may bestrongerthan$\mathcal { C}$$C$itself. In particular:

#SAT algorithms forn^k-size$\mathcal { C}$$C$-circuits running in 2ⁿ/n^ktime (for allk) implyNEXPdoes not have$(f \circ \mathcal { C})$$(f\circ C)$-circuits of polynomial size.

Applying#SAT algorithms from the literature, one immediate corollary of our results is thatQuasi-NPdoes not haveEMAJ∘ACC⁰∘THRcircuits of polynomial size, whereEMAJis the “exact majority” function, improving previous lower bounds againstACC⁰[Williams JACM’14] andACC⁰∘THR[Williams STOC’14], [Murray-Williams STOC’18]. This is the first nontrivial lower bound against such a circuit class.