Reading PAGE

Peer Evaluation activity

Trusted by 1
Downloads 3
Views 25

Total impact ?

    Send a

    Eric has...

    Trusted 2
    Reviewed 0
    Emailed 0
    Shared/re-used 0
    Discussed 0
    Invited 0
    Collected 0

     

    This was brought to you by:

    block this user Eric Allender Trusted member

    Professor

    Dept. of Computer Science, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ

    Amplifying lower bounds by means of self-reducibility

    Export to Mendeley

    We observe that many important computational problems in NC1 share a simple self-reducibility property. We then show that, for any problem A having this self-reducibility property, A has polynomial-size TC0 circuits if and only if it has TC0 circuits of size n1+&epsis; for every &epsis;> 0 (counting the number of wires in a circuit as the size of the circuit). As an example of what this observation yields, consider the Boolean Formula Evaluation problem (BFE), which is complete for NC1 and has the self-reducibility property. It follows from a lower bound of Impagliazzo, Paturi, and Saks, that BFE requires depth d TC0 circuits of size n1+&epsis;d. If one were able to improve this lower bound to show that there is some constant &epsis;> 0 (independent of the depth d) such that every TC0 circuit family recognizing BFE has size at least n1+&epsis;, then it would follow that TC0 NC1. We show that proving lower bounds of the form n1+&epsis; is not ruled out by the Natural Proof framework of Razborov and Rudich and hence there is currently no known barrier for separating classes such as ACC0, TC0 and NC1 via existing natural approaches to proving circuit lower bounds. We also show that problems with small uniform constant-depth circuits have algorithms that simultaneously have small space and time bounds. We then make use of known time-space tradeoff lower bounds to show that SAT requires uniform depth d TC0 and AC0[6] circuits of size n1+c for some constant c depending on d.

    Oh la laClose

    Your session has expired but don’t worry, your message
    has been saved.Please log in and we’ll bring you back
    to this page. You’ll just need to click “Send”.

    Your evaluation is of great value to our authors and readers. Many thanks for your time.

    Review Close

    Short review
    Select a comment
    Select a grade
    You and the author
    Anonymity My review is anonymous( Log in  or  Register )
    publish
    Close

    When you're done, click "publish"

    Only blue fields are mandatory.

    Relation to the author*
    Overall Comment*
    Anonymity* My review is anonymous( Log in  or  Register )
     

    Focus & Objectives*

    Have the objectives and the central topic been clearly introduced?

    Novelty & Originality*

    Do you consider this work to be an interesting contribution to knowledge?

    Arrangement, Transition and Logic

    Are the different sections of this work well arranged and distributed?

    Methodology & Results

    Is the author's methodology relevant to both the objectives and the results?

    Data Settings & Figures

    Were tables and figures appropriate and well conceived?

    References and bibliography

    Is this work well documented and has the bibliography been properly established?

    Writing

    Is this work well written, checked and edited?

    Write Your Review (you can paste text as well)
    Please be civil and constructive. Thank you.


    Grade (optional, N/A by default)

    N/A 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
    Close

    Your mailing list is currently empty.
    It will build up as you send messages
    and links to your peers.

     No one besides you has access to this list.
    Close
    Enter the e-mail addresses of your recipients in the box below.  Note: Peer Evaluation will NOT store these email addresses   log in
    Your recipients

    Your message:

    Your email : Your email address will not be stored or shared with others.

    Your message has been sent.

    Description

    Title : Amplifying lower bounds by means of self-reducibility
    Author(s) : Eric Allender, Michal Koucký
    Abstract : We observe that many important computational problems in NC1 share a simple self-reducibility property. We then show that, for any problem A having this self-reducibility property, A has polynomial-size TC0 circuits if and only if it has TC0 circuits of size n1+&epsis; for every &epsis;> 0 (counting the number of wires in a circuit as the size of the circuit). As an example of what this observation yields, consider the Boolean Formula Evaluation problem (BFE), which is complete for NC1 and has the self-reducibility property. It follows from a lower bound of Impagliazzo, Paturi, and Saks, that BFE requires depth d TC0 circuits of size n1+&epsis;d. If one were able to improve this lower bound to show that there is some constant &epsis;> 0 (independent of the depth d) such that every TC0 circuit family recognizing BFE has size at least n1+&epsis;, then it would follow that TC0 NC1. We show that proving lower bounds of the form n1+&epsis; is not ruled out by the Natural Proof framework of Razborov and Rudich and hence there is currently no known barrier for separating classes such as ACC0, TC0 and NC1 via existing natural approaches to proving circuit lower bounds. We also show that problems with small uniform constant-depth circuits have algorithms that simultaneously have small space and time bounds. We then make use of known time-space tradeoff lower bounds to show that SAT requires uniform depth d TC0 and AC0[6] circuits of size n1+c for some constant c depending on d.
    Subject : unspecified
    Area : Other
    Language : English
    Year : 2010

    Affiliations Dept. of Computer Science, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ
    Journal : Journal of the ACM
    Volume : 57
    Issue : 3
    Publisher : ACM
    Pages : 1 - 36
    Url : http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1706591.1706594
    Doi : 10.1145/1706591.1706594

    Leave a comment

    This contribution has not been reviewed yet. review?

    You may receive the Trusted member label after :

    • Reviewing 10 uploads, whatever the media type.
    • Being trusted by 10 peers.
    • If you are blocked by 10 peers the "Trust label" will be suspended from your page. We encourage you to contact the administrator to contest the suspension.

    Does this seem fair to you? Please make your suggestions.

    Please select an affiliation to sign your evaluation:

    Cancel Evaluation Save

    Please select an affiliation:

    Cancel   Save

    Eric's Peer Evaluation activity

    Trusted by 1
    Downloads 3
    Views 25

    Eric has...

    Trusted 2
    Reviewed 0
    Emailed 0
    Shared/re-used 0
    Discussed 0
    Invited 0
    Collected 0
    Invite this peer to...
    Title
    Start date (dd/mm/aaaa)
    Location
    URL
    Message
    send
    Close

    Full Text request

    Your request will be sent.

    Please enter your email address to be notified
    when this article becomes available

    Your email


     
    Your email address will not be shared or spammed.