Composition of Low-Error 2-Query PCPs Using Decodable PCPs
Abstract
The main result of this paper is a generic composition theorem for low-error two-query probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs). Prior to this work, composition of PCPs was well understood only in the constant error regime. Existing composition methods in the low-error regime were nonmodular (i.e., very much tailored to the specific PCPs that were being composed), resulting in complicated constructions of PCPs. Furthermore, until recently, composition in the low-error regime suffered from incurring an extra “consistency” query, resulting in PCPs that are not “two-query” and hence, much less useful for hardness-of-approximation reductions. In a recent breakthrough, Moshkovitz and Raz (Proceedings of the 49th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2008) [J. ACM, 57 (2010)] constructed almost linear-sized low-error 2-query PCPs for every language in NP. Indeed, the main technical component of their construction is a novel composition of certain specific PCPs. We generalize and abstract their composition method, thereby giving a modular and simpler proof of their result. To facilitate the modular composition, we introduce a new variant of PCP, which we call a decodable PCP (dPCP). A dPCP is an encoding of an NP witness that is both locally checkable and locally decodable. The dPCP verifier, in addition to verifying the validity of the given proof like a standard PCP verifier, also locally decodes the original NP witness. Our composition is generic in the sense that it works regardless of the way the component PCPs are constructed.
References
[1]
N. Alon, J. Bruck, J. Naor, M. Naor, and R. M. Roth, Construction of asymptotically good low-rate error-correcting codes through pseudo-random graphs, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 38 (1992), pp. 509--516.
[2]
S. Arora, L. Babai, J. Stern, and Z. Sweedyk, The hardness of approximate optima in lattices, codes, and systems of linear equations, J. Comput. System Sci., 54 (1997), pp. 317--331.
[3]
S. Arora, C. Lund, R. Motwani, M. Sudan, and M. Szegedy, Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems, J. ACM, 45 (1998), pp. 501--555.
[4]
S. Arora and S. Safra, Probabilistic checking of proofs: A new characterization of NP, J. ACM, 45 (1998), pp. 70--122.
[5]
S. Arora and M. Sudan, Improved low-degree testing and its applications, Combinatorica, 23 (2003), pp. 365--426.
[6]
E. Ben-Sasson, O. Goldreich, P. Harsha, M. Sudan, and S. Vadhan, Robust PCPs of proximity, shorter PCPs and applications to coding, SIAM J. Comput., 36 (2006), pp. 889--974.
[7]
M. Bellare, S. Goldwasser, C. Lund, and A. Russell, Efficient probabilistically checkable proofs and applications to approximation, in Proceedings of the $25$th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1993, pp. 294--304.
[8]
A. Bogdanov, Gap Amplification Fails Below 1/2, http://eccc.hpi-web.de/report/2005/046 (2005).
[9]
E. Ben-Sasson and M. Sudan, Short PCPs with polylog query complexity, SIAM J. Comput., 38 (2008), pp. 551--607.
[10]
I. Dinur, E. Fischer, G. Kindler, R. Raz, and S. Safra, PCP characterizations of NP: Toward a polynomially-small error-probability, Comput. Complexity, 20 (2011), pp. 413--504.
[11]
I. Dinur and P. Harsha, Composition of low-error 2-query PCPs using decodable PCPs, in Proceedings of the 50th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2009, pp. 472--481.
[12]
I. Dinur, The PCP theorem by gap amplification, J. ACM, 54 (2007), p. 12.
[13]
I. Dinur, PCPs with small soundness error, SIGACT News, 39 (2008), pp. 41--57.
[14]
I. Dinur and O. Meir, Derandomized parallel repetition via structured PCPs, Comput. Complexity, 20 (2011), pp. 207--327.
[15]
I. Dinur and O. Reingold, Assignment testers: Towards a combinatorial proof of the PCP theorem, SIAM J. Comput., 36 (2006), pp. 975--1024.
[16]
U. Feige, S. Goldwasser, L. Lovász, S. Safra, and M. Szegedy, Interactive proofs and the hardness of approximating cliques, J. ACM, 43 (1996), pp. 268--292.
[17]
U. Feige and J. Kilian, Impossibility results for recycling random bits in two-prover proof systems, in Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1995, pp. 457--468.
[18]
G. D. Forney, Concatenated Codes, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1966.
[19]
L. Fortnow, J. Rompel, and M. Sipser, On the power of multi-prover interactive protocols, Theoret. Comput. Sci., 134 (1994), pp. 545--557.
[20]
O. Goldreich, A Sample of Samplers--A Computational Perspective on Sampling, Technical report TR97-020, Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, 1997.
[21]
O. Goldreich and A. Wigderson, Tiny families of functions with random properties: A quality--size trade--off for hashing, Random Structures Algorithms, 11 (1997), pp. 315--343.
[22]
J. H\aastad, Some optimal inapproximability results, J. ACM, 48 (2001), pp. 798--859.
[23]
R. Impagliazzo, V. Kabanets, and A. Wigderson, New direct-product testers and 2-query PCPs, in Proceedings of the 41st ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 2009, pp. 131--140.
[24]
J. Katz and L. Trevisan, On the efficiency of local decoding procedures for error-correcting codes, in Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 2000, pp. 80--86.
[25]
D. Moshkovitz and R. Raz, Sub-constant error low degree test of almost-linear size, SIAM J. Comput., 38 (2008), pp. 140--180.
[26]
D. Moshkovitz and R. Raz, Sub-constant error probabilistically checkable proof of almost-linear size, Comput. Complexity, 19 (2010), pp. 367--422.
[27]
D. Moshkovitz and R. Raz, Two-query PCP with subconstant error, J. ACM, 57 (2010).
[28]
R. Raz, A parallel repetition theorem, SIAM J. Comput., 27 (1998), pp. 763--803.
[29]
R. Raz and S. Safra, A sub-constant error-probability low-degree test, and a sub-constant error-probability PCP characterization of NP, in Proceedings of the 29th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1997, pp. 475--484.
[30]
M. Szegedy, Many-valued logics and holographic proofs, in Proceedings of the $26$th International Colloquium of Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 1644, J. Wiedermann, P. van Emde Boas, and M. Nielsen, eds., Springer, New York, 1999, pp. 676--686.
Index Terms
- Composition of Low-Error 2-Query PCPs Using Decodable PCPs
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Composition of low-error 2-query PCPs using decodable PCPs
Property testingThe main result of this paper is a generic composition theorem for low error two-query probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs). Prior to this work, composition of PCPs was well-understood only in the constant error regime. Existing composition methods ...
Composition of low-error 2-query PCPs using decodable PCPs
Property testingThe main result of this paper is a generic composition theorem for low error two-query probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs). Prior to this work, composition of PCPs was well-understood only in the constant error regime. Existing composition methods ...
Composition of Low-Error 2-Query PCPs Using Decodable PCPs
FOCS '09: Proceedings of the 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer ScienceThe main result of this paper is a generic composition theorem for low error two-query probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs). Prior to this work, composition of PCPs was well-understood only in the constant error regime. Existing composition methods ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
© 2013, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
Publisher
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
United States
Publication History
Published: 01 January 2013
Author Tags
Author Tag
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025