
- {1} Scott Aaronson. Oracles are subtle but not malicious. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, 12(40), 2005. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {2} Miklos Ajtai. ¿1
1-formulae on finite structures. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 24:1-48, 1983.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {3} Vikraman Arvind and Johannes Köbler. On pseudorandomness and resource-bounded measure. In Proceedings of 17th Conference on the Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, pages 235-249. Springer, 1997. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {4} Boaz Barak. A probabilistic-time hierarchy theorem for "Slightly Non-uniform" algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2483:194-208, 2002. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {5} Nader Bshouty, Richard Cleve, Ricard Gavalda, Sampath Kannan, and Christino Tamon. Oracles and queries that are sufficient for exact learning. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 52(2):268-286, 1996. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {6} László Babai, Lance Fortnow, and Carsten Lund. Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols. Computational Complexity, 1:3-40, 1991.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {7} Harry Buhrman, Lance Fortnow, and Thomas Thierauf. Nonrelativizing separations. In Proceedings of 13th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 8-12, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {8} Theodore Baker, John Gill, and Robert Solovay. Relativizations of the P =? NP question. SIAM Journal on Computing, 4(4):431-442, 1975.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {9} Manuel Blum and Sampath Kannan. Designing programs that check their work. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 42:269-291, 1995. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {10} Jin-Yi Cai. S
2
p
¿ ZPP
NP
. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 620-629, 2001. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {11} Jin-Yi Cai and Osamu Watanabe. On proving circuit lower bounds against the polynomial-time hierarchy. SIAM Journal on Computing, 33(4):984-1009, 2004.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {12} Lance Fortnow and Rahul Santhanam. Hierarchy theorems for probabilistic polynomial time. In Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 316-324, 2004. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {13} Merrick Furst, James Saxe, and Michael Sipser. Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy. Mathematical Systems Theory, 17(1):13-27, April 1984.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {14} Oded Goldreich, Madhu Sudan, and Luca Trevisan. From logarithmic advice to single-bit advice. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, TR04-093, 2004.Google Scholar
- {15} Oded Goldreich and David Zuckerman. Another proof that BPP subseteq PH (and more). Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, TR97-045, 1997.Google Scholar
- {16} Johan Håstad. Almost optimal lower bounds for small depth circuits. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 6-20, 1986. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {17} Yenjo Han, Lane Hemaspaandra, and Thomas Thierauf. Threshold computation and cryptographic security. SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(1):59-78, 1997. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {18} Russell Impagliazzo, Valentine Kabanets, and Avi Wigderson. In search of an easy witness: Exponential time vs. probabilistic polynomial time. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 65(4):672-694, 2002. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {19} Ravi Kannan. Circuit-size lower bounds and nonreducibility to sparse sets. Information and Control, 55(1):40-56, 1982.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {20} Valentine Kabanets and Russell Impagliazzo. Derandomizing polynomial identity tests means proving circuit lower bounds. Computational Complexity, 13(1-2):1-46, 2004. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {21} Richard Karp and Richard Lipton. Turing machines that take advice. L'Enseignement Mathématique, 28(2):191-209, 1982.Google Scholar
- {22} Johannes Kobler and Osamu Watanabe. New collapse consequences of NP having small circuits. SIAM Journal on Computing, 28(1):311-324, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {23} Carsten Lund, Lance Fortnow, Howard Karloff, and Noam Nisan. Algebraic methods for interactive proof systems. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 39(4):859-868, 1992. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {24} Noam Nisan and Avi Wigderson. Hardness vs randomness. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 49(2):149-167, 1994. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {25} Ryan O'Donnell. Hardness amplification within NP. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 69(1):68-94, 2004. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {26} Alexander Razborov. Lower bounds for the monotone complexity of some boolean functions. Soviet Mathematics Doklady, 31:354-357, 1985.Google Scholar
- {27} Alexander Razborov. Lower bounds on the size of bounded-depth networks over the complete basis with logical addition. Mathematical Notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 41(4):333-338, 1987.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {28} Alexander Razborov and Steven Rudich. Natural proofs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 55(1):24-35, 1997. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {29} Alexander Russell and Ravi Sundaram. Symmetric alternation captures BPP. Computational Complexity, 7(2):152-162, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {30} Rahul Santhanam. Circuit lower bounds for Merlin-Arthur classes. Electronic Cooloquium on Computational Complexity, TR07-005, 2007.Google Scholar
- {31} Adi Shamir. IP = PSPACE. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 39(4):869-877, 1992. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {32} Roman Smolensky. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for boolean circuit complexity. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 77-82, 1987. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {33} Madhu Sudan, Luca Trevisan, and Salil Vadhan. Pseudorandom generators without the XOR lemma. Journal of Computer System Sciences, 62(2):236-266, 2001. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {34} Seinosuke Toda. On the computational power of PP and ¿P. In 30th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 514-519, 1989.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {35} Luca Trevisan and Salil Vadhan. Pseudorandomness and average-case complexity via uniform reductions. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, volume 17, 2002. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {36} Leslie Valiant. Completeness classes in algebra. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 249-261, 1979. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {37} Leslie Valiant. The complexity of computing the permanent. Theoretical Computer Science, 8:189-201, 1979.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {38} Nikolai Vereshchagin. On the power of PP. In Structure in Complexity Theory Conference, pages 138-143, 1992.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- {39} Variyam Vinodchandran. A note on the circuit complexity of pp. Theoretical Computer Science, 347(1-2):415-418, 2005. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {40} Christopher Wilson. Relativized circuit complexity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 31(2):169-181, 1985. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- {41} Andrew Yao. Theory and application of trapdoor functions. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 80-91, 1982.Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Circuit lower bounds for Merlin-Arthur classes
Recommendations
Circuit Lower Bounds for Merlin-Arthur Classes
We show that for each $k>0$, $\mathsf{MA}/1$ ($\mathsf{MA}$ with 1 bit of advice) does not have circuits of size $n^k$. This implies the first superlinear circuit lower bounds for the promise versions of the classes $\mathsf{MA}$, $\mathsf{AM}$, and $\...
Nondeterministic circuit lower bounds from mildly derandomizing Arthur-Merlin games
In several settings, derandomization is known to follow from circuit lower bounds that themselves are equivalent to the existence of pseudorandom generators. This leaves open the question whether derandomization implies the circuit lower bounds that are ...
Nondeterministic Circuit Lower Bounds from Mildly De-randomizing Arthur-Merlin Games
CCC '12: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC)Hardness against nondeterministic circuits is known to suffice for derandomizing Arthur-Merlin games. We show a result in the other direction - that hardness against nondeterministic circuits is *necessary* for derandomizing Arthur-Merlin games. In fact,...






Comments