Abstract
Research in the 1980s and 1990s showed how to construct a pseudorandom generator from a function that is hard to compute on more than 99% of the inputs. A more recent line of works showed, however, that if the generator has small error, then the proof of correctness cannot be implemented in subclasses of TC0, and hence the construction cannot be applied to the known hardness results. This article considers a typical class of pseudorandom generator constructions, and proves an analogous result for the case of large error.
- Sergei Artemenko and Ronen Shaltiel. 2014. Lower bounds on the query complexity of non-uniform and adaptive reductions showing hardness amplification. Computational Complexity 23, 1 (2014), 43--83. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- James Aspnes, Richard Beigel, Merrick Furst, and Steven Rudich. 1994. The expressive power of voting polynomials. Combinatorica. A Journal on Combinatorics and the Theory of Computing 14, 2 (1994), 135--148.Google Scholar
- Bill Fefferman, Ronen Shaltiel, Christopher Umans, and Emanuele Viola. 2013. On beating the hybrid argument. Theory of Computing 9 (2013), 809--843.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Oded Goldreich, Noam Nisan, and Avi Wigderson. 1995. On Yao’s XOR Lemma. Technical Report TR95--050. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity. www.eccc.uni-trier.de/.Google Scholar
- Aryeh Grinberg, Ronen Shaltiel, and Emanuele Viola. 2018. Indistinguishability by adaptive procedures with advice, and lower bounds on hardness amplification proofs. In IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’18). Available at http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/viola/.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Dan Gutfreund and Guy Rothblum. 2008. The complexity of local list decoding. In 12th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation (RANDOM’08).Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jeff Kinne, Dieter van Melkebeek, and Ronen Shaltiel. 2012. Pseudorandom generators, typically-correct derandomization, and circuit lower bounds. Computational Complexity 21, 1 (2012), 3--61. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Adam Klivans and Rocco A. Servedio. 2003. Boosting and hard-core sets. Machine Learning 53, 3 (2003), 217--238. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Adam R. Klivans. 2001. On the derandomization of constant depth circuits. In Workshop on Randomization and Computation (RANDOM’01). Springer.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Shachar Lovett and Emanuele Viola. 2012. Bounded-depth circuits cannot sample good codes. Computational Complexity 21, 2 (2012), 245--266. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Chi-Jen Lu, Shi-Chun Tsai, and Hsin-Lung Wu. 2011. Complexity of hard-core set proofs. Computational Complexity 20, 1 (2011), 145--171. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Moni Naor and Omer Reingold. 2004. Number-theoretic constructions of efficient pseudo-random functions. Journal of the ACM 51, 2 (2004), 231--262. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Noam Nisan. 1991. Pseudorandom bits for constant depth circuits. Combinatorica. A Journal on Combinatorics and the Theory of Computing 11, 1 (1991), 63--70.Google Scholar
- Noam Nisan and Avi Wigderson. 1994. Hardness vs randomness. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 49, 2 (1994), 149--167. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Alexander Razborov. 1987. Lower bounds on the dimension of schemes of bounded depth in a complete basis containing the logical addition function. Akademiya Nauk SSSR. Matematicheskie Zametki 41, 4 (1987), 598--607. English translation in Mathematical Notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 41, 4 (1987), 333--338.Google Scholar
- Alexander Razborov and Steven Rudich. 1997. Natural proofs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 55, 1 (Aug. 1997), 24--35.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ronen Shaltiel and Emanuele Viola. 2010. Hardness amplification proofs require majority. SIAM Journal on Computing 39, 7 (2010), 3122--3154.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Roman Smolensky. 1987. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for Boolean circuit complexity. In 19th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC’87). ACM, 77--82.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Emanuele Viola. 2004. The complexity of constructing pseudorandom generators from hard functions. Computational Complexity 13, 3--4 (2004), 147--188. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Emanuele Viola. 2006. The Complexity of Hardness Amplification and Derandomization. Ph.D. Dissertation. Harvard University. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Emanuele Viola. 2007. Pseudorandom bits for constant-depth circuits with few arbitrary symmetric gates. SIAM Journal on Computing 36, 5 (2007), 1387--1403. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Emanuele Viola. 2009. On the power of small-depth computation. Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science 5, 1 (2009), 1--72. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Constant-Error Pseudorandomness Proofs from Hardness Require Majority
Recommendations
Hardness amplification proofs require majority
STOC '08: Proceedings of the fortieth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computingHardness amplification is the fundamental task of converting a δ-hard function f : (0, 1)n -> (0, 1) into a (1/2-ε)-hard function Amp(f), where f is γ-hard if small circuits fail to compute f on at least a γ fraction of the inputs. Typically, ε,δ are ...
Hardness Amplification Proofs Require Majority
Hardness amplification is the fundamental task of converting a $\delta$-hard function $f:\{0,1\}^n\to\{0,1\}$ into a $(1/2-\epsilon)$-hard function $\mathit{Amp}(f)$, where $f$ is $\gamma$-hard if small circuits fail to compute $f$ on at least a $\gamma$...
Pseudorandomness when the odds are against you
CCC '16: Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Computational ComplexityImpagliazzo and Wigderson [25] showed that if E = DTIME(2O(n)) requires size 2Ω(n) circuits, then every time T constant-error randomized algorithm can be simulated deterministically in time poly(T). However, such polynomial slowdown is a deal breaker ...






Comments