Cited By
View all- Beniamini G(2022)The approximate degree of bipartite perfect matchingProceedings of the 37th Computational Complexity Conference10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2022.1(1-26)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
Algorithmic Polynomials
Abstract
The approximate degree of a Boolean function $f(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{n})$ is the minimum degree of a real polynomial that approximates $f$ pointwise within $1/3$. Upper bounds on approximate degree have a variety of applications in learning theory, differential privacy, and algorithm design in general. Nearly all known upper bounds on approximate degree arise in an existential manner from bounds on quantum query complexity. We develop a novel, first-principles approach to the polynomial approximation of Boolean functions. We use it to give the first constructive upper bounds on the approximate degree of several fundamental problems: $O(n^{\frac{3}{4}-\frac{1}{4(2^{k}-1)}})$ for the $k$-element distinctness problem; $O(n^{1-\frac{1}{k+1}})$ for the $k$-subset sum problem; $O(n^{1-\frac{1}{k+1}})$ for any $k$-DNF or $k$-CNF formula; and $O(n^{3/4})$ for the surjectivity problem. In all cases, we obtain explicit, closed-form approximating polynomials that are unrelated to the quantum arguments from previous work. Our first three results match the bounds from quantum query complexity. Our fourth result improves polynomially on the $\Theta(n)$ quantum query complexity of the problem and refutes the conjecture by several experts that surjectivity has approximate degree $\Omega(n)$. In particular, we exhibit the first natural problem with a polynomial gap between approximate degree and quantum query complexity.
References
[1]
S. Aaronson, Limitations of quantum advice and one-way communication, Theory Comput., 1 (2005), pp. 1--28, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2005.v001a001.
[2]
S. Aaronson, S. Ben-David, and R. Kothari, Separations in query complexity using cheat sheets, in Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 2016, pp. 863--876, https://doi.org/10.1145/2897518.2897644.
[3]
S. Aaronson and Y. Shi, Quantum lower bounds for the collision and the element distinctness problems, J. ACM, 51 (2004), pp. 595--605, https://doi.org/10.1145/1008731.1008735.
[4]
A. Ambainis, Polynomial degree and lower bounds in quantum complexity: Collision and element distinctness with small range, Theory Comput., 1 (2005), pp. 37--46, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2005.v001a003.
[5]
A. Ambainis, Polynomial degree vs. quantum query complexity, J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 72 (2006), pp. 220--238, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2005.06.006.
[6]
A. Ambainis, Quantum walk algorithm for element distinctness, SIAM J. Comput., 37 (2007), pp. 210--239, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0097539705447311.
[7]
A. Ambainis, A. M. Childs, B. Reichardt, R. Špalek, and S. Zhang, Any AND-OR formula of size $N$ can be evaluated in time $N^{1/2+o(1)}$ on a quantum computer, SIAM J. Comput., 39 (2010), pp. 2513--2530, https://doi.org/10.1137/080712167.
[8]
J. Aspnes, R. Beigel, M. L. Furst, and S. Rudich, The expressive power of voting polynomials, Combinatorica, 14 (1994), pp. 135--148, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01215346.
[9]
R. Beals, H. Buhrman, R. Cleve, M. Mosca, and R. de Wolf, Quantum lower bounds by polynomials, J. ACM, 48 (2001), pp. 778--797, https://doi.org/10.1145/502090.502097.
[10]
P. Beame and T. Huynh, Multiparty communication complexity and threshold circuit size of $\mathsf{AC}^0$, SIAM J. Comput., 41 (2012), pp. 484--518, https://doi.org/10.1137/100792779.
[11]
P. Beame and W. Machmouchi, The quantum query complexity of $\AC^0$, Quantum Inf. Comput., 12 (2012), pp. 670--676.
[12]
R. Beigel, N. Reingold, and D. A. Spielman, PP is closed under intersection, J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 50 (1995), pp. 191--202, https://doi.org/10.1006/jcss.1995.1017.
[13]
A. Belovs, Learning-graph-based quantum algorithm for $k$-distinctness, in Proceedings of the 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2012, pp. 207--216, https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2012.18.
[14]
A. Belovs and R. Špalek, Adversary lower bound for the $k$-sum problem, in Proceedings of Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS), 2013, pp. 323--328, https://doi.org/10.1145/2422436.2422474.
[15]
S. Ben-David, A. Bouland, A. Garg, and R. Kothari, Classical lower bounds from quantum upper bounds, in Proceedings of the 59th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2018, pp. 339--349, https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2018.00040.
[16]
H. Buhrman, R. Cleve, R. de Wolf, and C. Zalka, Bounds for small-error and zero-error quantum algorithms, in Proceedings of the 40th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 1999, pp. 358--368, https://doi.org/10.1109/SFFCS.1999.814607.
[17]
H. Buhrman and R. de Wolf, Communication complexity lower bounds by polynomials, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), 2001, pp. 120--130, https://doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2001.933879.
[18]
H. Buhrman, C. Dürr, M. Heiligman, P. Høyer, F. Magniez, M. Santha, and R. de Wolf, Quantum algorithms for element distinctness, SIAM J. Comput., 34 (2005), pp. 1324--1330, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0097539702402780.
[19]
H. Buhrman, I. Newman, H. Röhrig, and R. de Wolf, Robust polynomials and quantum algorithms, Theory Comput. Syst., 40 (2007), pp. 379--395, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00224-006-1313-z.
[20]
H. Buhrman, N. K. Vereshchagin, and R. de Wolf, On computation and communication with small bias, in Proceedings of the 22nd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), 2007, pp. 24--32, https://doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2007.18.
[21]
M. Bun, R. Kothari, and J. Thaler, The polynomial method strikes back: Tight quantum query bounds via dual polynomials, in Proceedings of the 50th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 2018, pp. 297--310, https://doi.org/10.1145/3188745.3188784.
[22]
M. Bun, R. Kothari, and J. Thaler, Quantum algorithms and approximating polynomials for composed functions with shared inputs, in Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), 2019, pp. 662--678, https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611975482.42.
[23]
M. Bun and J. Thaler, A nearly optimal lower bound on the approximate degree of $\AC^0$, in Proceedings of the 58th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2017, pp. 1--12, https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.10.
[24]
K. Chandrasekaran, J. Thaler, J. Ullman, and A. Wan, Faster private release of marginals on small databases, in Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS), 2014, pp. 387--402, https://doi.org/10.1145/2554797.2554833.
[25]
A. Chattopadhyay and A. Ada, Multiparty communication complexity of disjointness, in Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), Report TR08-002, 2008.
[26]
E. W. Cheney, Introduction to Approximation Theory, 2nd ed., Chelsea Publishing, New York, 1982.
[27]
A. M. Childs and J. M. Eisenberg, Quantum algorithms for subset finding, Quantum Inf. Comput., 5 (2005), pp. 593--604.
[28]
A. Drucker and R. de Wolf, Quantum proofs for classical theorems, Theory Comput. Grad. Surv., 2 (2011), pp. 1--54, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.gs.2011.002.
[29]
A. Drucker and R. de Wolf, Uniform approximation by (quantum) polynomials, Quantum Inf. Comput., 11 (2011), pp. 215--225.
[30]
E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A quantum algorithm for the Hamiltonian NAND tree, Theory Comput., 4 (2008), pp. 169--190, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2008.v004a008.
[31]
X. Huang and E. Viola, Approximate degree-weight and indistinguishability, in Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), Report TR19-085, 2019.
[32]
S. Jukna, Extremal Combinatorics with Applications in Computer Science, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17364-6.
[33]
J. Kahn, N. Linial, and A. Samorodnitsky, Inclusion-exclusion: Exact and approximate, Combinatorica, 16 (1996), pp. 465--477, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01271266.
[34]
A. T. Kalai, A. R. Klivans, Y. Mansour, and R. A. Servedio, Agnostically learning halfspaces, SIAM J. Comput., 37 (2008), pp. 1777--1805, https://doi.org/10.1137/060649057.
[35]
H. Klauck, R. Špalek, and R. de Wolf, Quantum and classical strong direct product theorems and optimal time-space tradeoffs, SIAM J. Comput., 36 (2007), pp. 1472--1493, https://doi.org/10.1137/05063235X.
[36]
A. R. Klivans, R. O'Donnell, and R. A. Servedio, Learning intersections and thresholds of halfspaces, J. Comput. System Sci., 68 (2004), pp. 808--840, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2003.11.002.
[37]
A. R. Klivans and R. A. Servedio, Learning DNF in time $2^{\tilde O(n^{1/3})}$, J. Comput. System Sci., 68 (2004), pp. 303--318, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2003.07.007.
[38]
M. Krause and P. Pudlák, On the computational power of depth-2 circuits with threshold and modulo gates, Theoret. Comput. Sci., 174 (1997), pp. 137--156, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3975(96)00019-9.
[39]
M. Krause and P. Pudlák, Computing Boolean functions by polynomials and threshold circuits, Comput. Complexity, 7 (1998), pp. 346--370, https://doi.org/10.1007/s000370050015.
[40]
S. Kutin, Quantum lower bound for the collision problem with small range, Theory Comput., 1 (2005), pp. 29--36, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2005.v001a002.
[41]
T. Lee and A. Shraibman, Disjointness is hard in the multiparty number-on-the-forehead model, Comput. Complexity, 18 (2009), pp. 309--336, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-009-0276-2.
[42]
N. Linial and N. Nisan, Approximate inclusion-exclusion, Combinatorica, 10 (1990), pp. 349--365, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02128670.
[43]
U. Mahadev and R. de Wolf, Rational approximations and quantum algorithms with postselection, Quantum Inf. Comput., 15 (2015), pp. 295--307.
[44]
V. A. Markov, On Functions of Least Deviation from Zero in a Given Interval, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, 1892 (in Russian).
[45]
M. L. Minsky and S. A. Papert, Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1969.
[46]
N. Nisan and M. Szegedy, On the degree of Boolean functions as real polynomials, Comput. Complexity, 4 (1994), pp. 301--313, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01263419.
[47]
R. O'Donnell and R. A. Servedio, New degree bounds for polynomial threshold functions, Combinatorica, 30 (2010), pp. 327--358, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00493-010-2173-3.
[48]
R. Paturi, On the degree of polynomials that approximate symmetric Boolean functions, in Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1992, pp. 468--474, https://doi.org/10.1145/129712.129758.
[49]
R. Paturi and M. E. Saks, Approximating threshold circuits by rational functions, Inform. and Comput., 112 (1994), pp. 257--272, https://doi.org/10.1006/inco.1994.1059.
[50]
A. A. Razborov, Quantum communication complexity of symmetric predicates, Izv. Math., 67 (2002), pp. 145--159.
[51]
A. A. Razborov and A. A. Sherstov, The sign-rank of $\AC^0$, SIAM J. Comput., 39 (2010), pp. 1833--1855, https://doi.org/10.1137/080744037.
[52]
T. J. Rivlin, An Introduction to the Approximation of Functions, Dover, New York, 1981.
[53]
A. A. Sherstov, Communication lower bounds using dual polynomials, Bull. Eur. Assoc. Theor. Comput. Sci. EATCS, 95 (2008), pp. 59--93.
[54]
A. A. Sherstov, Approximate inclusion-exclusion for arbitrary symmetric functions, Comput. Complexity, 18 (2009), pp. 219--247, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-009-0274-4.
[55]
A. A. Sherstov, Separating $\AC^0$ from depth-2 majority circuits, SIAM J. Comput., 38 (2009), pp. 2113--2129, https://doi.org/10.1137/08071421X.
[56]
A. A. Sherstov, The pattern matrix method, SIAM J. Comput., 40 (2011), pp. 1969--2000, https://doi.org/10.1137/080733644.
[57]
A. A. Sherstov, Making polynomials robust to noise, Theory Comput., 9 (2013), pp. 593--615, https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2013.v009a018.
[58]
A. A. Sherstov, Communication lower bounds using directional derivatives, J. ACM, 61 (2014), pp. 1--71, https://doi.org/10.1145/2629334.
[59]
A. A. Sherstov, The multiparty communication complexity of set disjointness, SIAM J. Comput., 45 (2016), pp. 1450--1489, https://doi.org/10.1137/120891587.
[60]
A. A. Sherstov and J. Thaler, Vanishing-error approximate degree and QMA complexity, 2019.
[61]
K.-Y. Siu, V. P. Roychowdhury, and T. Kailath, Rational approximation techniques for analysis of neural networks, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 40 (1994), pp. 455--466, https://doi.org/10.1109/18.312168.
[62]
A. Tal, Shrinkage of de Morgan formulas by spectral techniques, in Proceedings of the 55th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2014, pp. 551--560, https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2014.65.
[63]
A. Tal, Formula lower bounds via the quantum method, in Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 2017, pp. 1256--1268, https://doi.org/10.1145/3055399.3055472.
[64]
J. Tarui and T. Tsukiji, Learning DNF by approximating inclusion-exclusion formulae, in Proceedings of the $14$th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), 1999, pp. 215--221, https://doi.org/10.1109/CCC.1999.766279.
[65]
J. Thaler, J. Ullman, and S. P. Vadhan, Faster algorithms for privately releasing marginals, in Proceedings of the 39th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), 2012, pp. 810--821, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31594-7_68.
[66]
R. de Wolf, A note on quantum algorithms and the minimal degree of $\epsilon$-error polynomials for symmetric functions, Quantum Inf. Comput., 8 (2008), pp. 943--950.
Recommendations
Algorithmic polynomials
STOC 2018: Proceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of ComputingThe approximate degree of a Boolean function f(x1,x2,…,xn) is the minimum degree of a real polynomial that approximates f pointwise within 1/3. Upper bounds on approximate degree have a variety of applications in learning theory, differential privacy, ...
A Nearly Optimal Lower Bound on the Approximate Degree of AC$^0$
The approximate degree of a Boolean function $f \colon \{-1, 1\}^n \rightarrow \{-1, 1\}$ is the least degree of a real polynomial that approximates $f$ pointwise to error at most 1/3. We introduce a generic method for increasing the approximate degree of ...
The polynomial method strikes back: tight quantum query bounds via dual polynomials
STOC 2018: Proceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of ComputingThe approximate degree of a Boolean function f is the least degree of a real polynomial that approximates f pointwise to error at most 1/3. The approximate degree of f is known to be a lower bound on the quantum query complexity of f (Beals et al., FOCS ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
DOI:10.1137/smjcat.49.6
Issue’s Table of Contents© 2020, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
Publisher
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
United States
Publication History
Published: 01 January 2020
Author Tags
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 02 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Beniamini G(2022)The approximate degree of bipartite perfect matchingProceedings of the 37th Computational Complexity Conference10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2022.1(1-26)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in