Derandomizing Arthur-Merlin Games and Approximate Counting Implies Exponential-Size Lower Bounds

Computational Complexity

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 329-366

  Aydinlioglu B ^a   Gutfreund, Dan ^b   Hitchcock, John M ^c   Kawachi, Akinori ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b IBM RESEARCH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING   (United States)

^d TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Approximate counting; Arthur Merlin protocols; circuit complexity; derandomization

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960561408     PISSN: 10163328     EISSN: 14208954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00037-011-0010-8     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. S. Aaronson, B. Aydi{dotless}nli{dotless}og̃lu, H. Buhrman, J. Hitchcock & D. van Melkebeek, "A note on exponential circuit lower bounds from derandomizing Arthur-Merlin games," ECCC technical report. TR10-174, 2010.
2. S. Arora, & B. Barak, "Complexity Theory: A Modern Approach," Cambridge University Press, 2009.
3. V. Arvind & P. Mukhopadhyay, "Derandomizing the isolation lemma and lower bounds for circuit size," in Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Optimization Problems and the 12th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation, ser. LNCS 5171, 2008, pp. 276-289.
4. A. Atserias, "Distinguishing SAT from polynomial-size circuits, through black-box queries," in Proceedings of the 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pp. 88-95, 2006.
5. L. Babai, L. Fortnow, N. Nisan & A. Wigderson, "BPP has subexponential simulation unless EXPTIME has publishable proofs," Computational Complexity, vol. 3, pp. 307-318, 1993.
6. Babai L.,Moran S: "Arthur-Merlin games: a randomized proof system, and a hierarchy of complexity classes". Journal of Computer and System Sciences 36, 254-276 (1988).
7. M. Blum & S. Micali, "How to generate cryptographically strong sequences of pseudo-random bits," SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 850864, 1984.
8. A. Bogdanov & L. Trevisan, "On worst-case to average-case reductions for NP problems,"SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1119-1159, 2006.
9. Bshouty N. H., Cleve R., Gavaldà R., Kannan S., Tamon C.: "Oracles and queries that are sufficient for exact learning,". Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 52(3), 421-433 (1996).
10. H. Buhrman, L. Fortnow & T. Thierauf, "Nonrelativizing separations," in Proceedings of the 13rd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, 1998, pp. 8-12.
11. Cai J.-Y.Journal of Computer and System Sciences 73(1), 25-35 (2007).
12. 2via Arthur and Merlin," in Proceedings of the 25th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, 2008, pp. 157-168.
13. Dvir Z., Shpilka A., Yehudanoff A.: "Hardness-randomness tradeoffs for bounded depth arithmetic circuits,". SIAM Journal on Computing 39(4), 1279-1293 (2009).
14. Even S., Selman A. L., Yacobi Y.: "The complexity of promise problems with applications to public-key cryptography,". Information and Control 61(2), 159-173 (1984).
15. Fortnow L., Pavan A., Sengupta S.: "Proving SAT does not have small circuits with an application to the two queries problem,". Journal of Computer and System Sciences 74(3), 358-363 (2008).
16. M. Fürer, O. Goldreich, Y. Mansour, M. Sipser & S. Zachos, "On completeness and soundness in interactive proof systems," Advances in Computing Research 5: Randomness and Computation, pp. 429-442, 1989.
17. O. Goldreich, "On promise problems (a survey in memory of Shimon Even [1935-2004])," ECCC technical report. TR05-018, 2005.
18. O. Goldreich, "Computational Complexity: A Conceptual Perspective," Cambridge University Press, 2008.
19. O. Goldreich, "In a world of P=BPP," ECCC technical report. TR10-135, 2010.
20. Goldwasser S., Micali S., Rackoff C.: "The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems,". SIAM Journal on Computing 18(1), 186-208 (1989).
21. S. Goldwasser & M. Sipser, "Private coins versus public coins in interactive proof system," in Advances in Computing Research, Vol. 5: Randomness and Computation, S. Micali, Ed. JAI Press, 1989, pp. 73-90.
22. D. Gutfreund & A. Kawachi, "Derandomizing Arthur-Merlin Games and Approximate Counting Implies Exponential-Size Lower Bounds," in Proceedings of the 25th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, 2010, pp. 38-49.
23. Impagliazzo R., Kabanets V., Wigderson A.: "In search of an easy witness: exponential time vs. probabilistic polynomial time,". Journal of Computer and System Sciences 65(4), 672-694 (2002).
24. R. Impagliazzo & A. Wigderson, "P=BPP if E requires exponential circuits: Derandomizing the XOR lemma," in Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1997, pp. 220-229.
25. Kabanets V., Impagliazzo R.: "Derandomizing polynomial identity tests means proving circuit lower bounds,". Computational Complexity 13(1-2), 1-46 (2004).
26. Kannan R.: "Circuit-size lower bound and non-reducibility to sparse sets,". Information and Control 55(1-3), 40-56 (1982).
27. R. M. Karp & R. J. Lipton, "Some connections between nonuniform and uniform complexity classes," in Proceedings of the 12th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Computer Science, 1980, pp. 302-309.
28. J. Kinne, D. van Melkebeek & R. Shaltiel, "Pseudorandom generators and typically-correct derandomization," in Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Optimization Problems and the 13th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation, 2009, pp. 574-587.
29. Klivans A. R., van Melkebeek D.: "Graph nonisomorphism has subexponential size proofs unless the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses,". SIAM Journal on Computing 31(5), 1501-1526 (2002).
30. Miltersen P. B., Vinodchandran N. V.: "Derandomizing Arthur-Merlin games using hitting sets,". Computational Complexity 14(3), 256-279 (2005).
31. P. B. Miltersen, N. V. Vinodchandran & O. Watanabe, "Super-polynomial versus half-exponential circuit size in the exponential hierarchy," in Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Computing and Combinatorics, 1999, pp. 210-220.
32. Nisan N.: "Pseudorandom bits for constant depth circuits,". Combinatorica 11, 63-70 (1991).
33. Nisan N., Wigderson A.: "Hardness vs. randomness,". Journal of Computer and System Sciences 49, 149-167 (1994).
34. R. Santhanam, "Circuit lower bounds for Merlin-Arthur classes," in Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2007, pp. 275-283.
35. R. Shaltiel & C. Umans, "Simple extractors for all min-entropies and a new pseudo-random generator," Journal of ACM, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 172-216, 2005.
36. Shaltiel R., Umans C.: "Pseudorandomness for approximate counting and sampling,". Computational Complexity 15(4), 298-341 (2006).
37. Shannon C. E.: "The synthesis of two-terminal switching circuits,". Bell System Technical Journal 28(1), 59-98 (1949).
38. Umans C.: "Pseudo-random generators for all hardnesses,". Journal of Computer and System Sciences 67(2), 419-440 (2003).
39. Viola E.: "Pseudorandom bits for constant-depth circuits with few arbitrary symmetric gates,". SIAM Journal on Computing 36(5), 1387-1403 (2007).
40. A. C. Yao, "Theory and application of trapdoor functions,"in Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1982, pp. 80-91.