Search for: All records

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 \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) . 

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.) 

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. 

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. Several important complexity questions could be resolved if we could make substantial improvements in the input size required for lifting with the Index function, 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 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 the Index function of near-linear 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; 1) The conjecture of Lovett et al. is false when the size of the Index gadget is logN−\omega(1). 2) Also, the Inner-Product function, which satisfies the disperser property at size O(logN), does not have this property when its size is log N−\omega(1). 3) Nonetheless, using Index gadgets of size at least 4, we prove a lifting theorem for a restricted class of communication protocols in which one of the players is limited to sending parities of its inputs. 4) Using the ideas from this lifting theorem, we derive a strong lifting theorem from decision tree size to parity decision tree size. We use this to derive a general lifting theorem in proof complexity from tree-resolution size to tree-like Res(\oplus) refutation size, which yields many new exponential lower bounds on such proofs. 

Algebraic reasoning has proven to be one of the most effective approaches for verifying gate-level integer multipliers, but it struggles with certain components, necessitating the complementary use of SAT solvers. For this reason validation certificates require proofs in two different formats. Approaches to unify the certificates are not scalable, meaning that the validation results can only be trusted up to the correctness of compositional reasoning. We show in this paper that using dual variables in the algebraic encoding, together with a novel tail substitution and carry rewriting method, removes the need for SAT solvers in the verification flow and yields a single, uniform proof certificate. 

We develop a new semi-algebraic proof system called Stabbing Planes which formalizes modern branch-and-cut algorithms for integer programming and is in the style of DPLL-based modern SAT solvers. As with DPLL there is only a single rule: the current polytope can be subdivided by branching on an inequality and its “integer negation.” That is, we can (non-deterministically choose) a hyperplane ax ≥ b with integer coefficients, which partitions the polytope into three pieces: the points in the polytope satisfying ax ≥ b, the points satisfying ax ≤ b, and the middle slab b − 1 < ax < b. Since the middle slab contains no integer points it can be safely discarded, and the algorithm proceeds recursively on the other two branches. Each path terminates when the current polytope is empty, which is polynomial-time checkable. Among our results, we show that Stabbing Planes can efficiently simulate the Cutting Planes proof system, and is equivalent to a tree-like variant of the R(CP) system of Krajicek [54]. As well, we show that it possesses short proofs of the canonical family of systems of F_2-linear equations known as the Tseitin formulas. Finally, we prove linear lower bounds on the rank of Stabbing Planes refutations by adapting lower bounds in communication complexity and use these bounds in order to show that Stabbing Planes proofs cannot be balanced. 

Systems mixing Boolean logic and arithmetic have been a long-standing challenge for verification tools such as SAT-based bit-vector solvers. Though SAT solvers can be highly efficient for Boolean reasoning, they scale poorly once multiplication is involved. Algebraic methods using Gröbner basis reduction have recently been used to efficiently verify multiplier circuits in isolation, but generally do not perform well on problems involving bit-level reasoning. We propose that pseudo-Boolean solvers equipped with cutting planes reasoning have the potential to combine the complementary strengths of the existing SAT and algebraic approaches while avoiding their weaknesses. Theoretically, we show that there are optimal-length cutting planes proofs for a large class of bit-level properties of some well known multiplier circuits. This scaling is significantly better than the smallest proofs known for SAT and, in some instances, for algebraic methods. We also show that cutting planes reasoning can extract bit-level consequences of word-level equations in exponentially fewer steps than methods based on Gröbner bases. Experimentally, we demonstrate that pseudo-Boolean solvers can verify the word-level equivalence of adder-based multiplier architectures, as well as commutativity of bit-vector multiplication, in times comparable to the best algebraic methods. We then go further than previous approaches and also verify these properties at the bit-level. Finally, we find examples of simple nonlinear bit-vector inequalities that are intractable for current bit-vector and SAT solvers but easy for pseudo-Boolean solvers.