[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to main content

Sparse Selfreducible Sets and Polynomial Size Circuit Lower Bounds

  • Conference paper
STACS 2006 (STACS 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 3884))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1371 Accesses

Abstract

It is well-known that the class of sets that can be computed by polynomial size circuits is equal to the class of sets that are polynomial time reducible to a sparse set. It is widely believed, but unfortunately up to now unproven, that there are sets in EXPNP, or even in EXP that are not computable by polynomial size circuits and hence are not reducible to a sparse set. In this paper we study this question in a more restricted setting: what is the computational complexity of sparse sets that are selfreducible? It follows from earlier work of Lozano and Toran [10] that EXPNP does not have sparse selfreducible hard sets. We define a natural version of selfreduction, tree-selfreducibility, and show that NEXP does not have sparse tree-selfreducible hard sets. We also show that this result is optimal with respect to relativizing proofs, by exhibiting an oracle relative to which all of EXP is reducible to a sparse tree-selfreducible set. These lower bounds are corollaries of more general results about the computational complexity of sparse sets that are selfreducible, and can be interpreted as super-polynomial circuit lower bounds for NEXP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Agrawal, M., Arvind, V.: Quasi-linear truth-table reductions to p-selective sets. Theoretical Computer Science 158, 361–370 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Beigel, R., Kummer, M., Stephan, F.: Approximable sets. Information and Computation 120, 304–314 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Berman, L., Hartmanis, H.: On isomorphisms and density of NP and other complete sets. SIAM J. Comput. 6, 305–322 (1977)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Buhrman, H., Fortnow, L., Thierauf, T.: Nonrelativizing separations. In: IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pp. 8–12. IEE Computer Society Press (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buhrman, H., Torenvliet, L.: P-selective self-reducible sets: A new characterization of P. J. Computer and System Sciences 53, 210–217 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Fortnow, L., Klivans, A.: NP with small advice. In: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE Conference on Computationa Complexity, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hemaspaandra, L., Torenvliet, L.: Theory of Semi-Feasible Algorithms. In: Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ko, K.I.: On self-reducibility and weak P-selectivity. J. Comput. System Sci. 26, 209–211 (1983)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Ko, K., Schöning, U.: On circuit-size and the low hierarchy in NP. SIAM J. Comput. 14, 41–51 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Lozano, A., Torán, J.: Self-reducible sets of small density. Mathematical Systems Theory (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Meyer, A.: oral communication. cited in [3] (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mocas, S.: Separating Exponential Time Classes from Polynomial Time Classes. PhD thesis, Northeastern University (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ogihara, M.: Polynomial-time membership comparable sets. SIAM Journal on Computing 24, 1168–1181 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Ogiwara, M., Watanabe, O.: On polynomial time bounded truth-table reducibility of NP sets to sparse sets. SIAM J. Comput. 20, 471–483 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Papadimitriou, C.: Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Selman, A.: P-selective sets, tally languages, and the behavior of polynomial time reducibilities on NP. Math. Systems Theory 13, 55–65 (1979)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Selman, A.: Analogues of semicursive sets and effective reducibilities to the study of NP complexity. Information and Control 52, 36–51 (1982)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Shaltiel, R., Umans, C.: Pseudorandomness for approximate counting and sampling. Technical Report TR04-086, ECCC (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wagner, K.: Bounded query computations. In: Proc. 3rd Structure in Complexity in Conference, pp. 260–278. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wilson, C.: Relativized circuit complexity. J. Comput. System Sci. 31, 169–181 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Buhrman, H., Torenvliet, L., Unger, F. (2006). Sparse Selfreducible Sets and Polynomial Size Circuit Lower Bounds. In: Durand, B., Thomas, W. (eds) STACS 2006. STACS 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3884. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11672142_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11672142_37

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-32301-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32288-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics