Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

On (simple) decision tree rank

Published: 02 November 2023 Publication History

Abstract

In the decision tree computation model for Boolean functions, the depth corresponds to query complexity, and the size corresponds to storage space. The depth measure is the most well-studied one, and is known to be polynomially related to several non-computational complexity measures of functions such as certificate complexity. The size measure is also studied, but to a lesser extent. Another decision tree measure that has received very little attention is the minimal rank of the decision tree, first introduced by Ehrenfeucht and Haussler in 1989. This measure is closely related to the logarithm of the size, but is not polynomially related to depth, and hence it can reveal additional information about the complexity of a function. It is characterised by the value of a Prover-Delayer game first proposed by Pudlák and Impagliazzo in the context of tree-like resolution proofs.
In this paper we study this measure further. We obtain an upper bound on depth in terms of rank and Fourier sparsity. We obtain upper and lower bounds on rank in terms of (variants of) certificate complexity. We also obtain upper and lower bounds on the rank for composed functions in terms of the depth of the outer function and the rank of the inner function. This allows us to easily recover known asympotical lower bounds on logarithm of the size for Iterated AND-OR and Iterated 3-bit Majority. We compute the rank exactly for several natural functions and use them to show that all the bounds we have obtained are tight. We also show that rank in the simple decision tree model can be used to bound query complexity, or depth, in the more general conjunctive decision tree model. Finally, we improve upon the known size lower bound for the Tribes function and conclude that in the size-rank relationship for decision trees, obtained by Ehrenfeucht and Haussler, the upper bound for Tribes is asymptotically tight.

Highlights

Relating decision tree rank for Boolean functions with depth (query complexity), size, sparsity, certificate complexity.
Relating rank of composed function with depth of outer function and rank of inner function.
Decision tree size lower bound for composed functions in terms of depth of outer function and rank of inner function.
Sandwiching depth of (AND,OR) decision trees between simple decision tree rank and log size.

References

[1]
James Aspnes, Eric Blais, Murat Demirbas, Ryan O'Donnell, Atri Rudra, Steve Uurtamo, k+ decision trees - (extended abstract), in: 6th International Workshop on Algorithms for Sensor Systems, Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, and Autonomous Mobile Entities, ALGOSENSORS, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6451, Springer, 2010, pp. 74–88. full version on author's webpage http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~odonnell/papers/k-plus-dts.pdf.
[2]
Yosi Ben-Asher, Ilan Newman, Decision trees with Boolean threshold queries, J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 51 (3) (1995) 495–502.
[3]
Eli Ben-Sasson, Russell Impagliazzo, Avi Wigderson, Near optimal separation of tree-like and general resolution, Combinatorica 24 (4) (2004) 585–603.
[4]
Olaf Beyersdorff, Nicola Galesi, Massimo Lauria, A characterization of tree-like resolution size, Inf. Process. Lett. 113 (18) (2013) 666–671.
[5]
Avrim Blum, Rank-r decision trees are a subclass of r-decision lists, Inf. Process. Lett. 42 (4) (1992) 183–185.
[6]
Manuel Blum, Russell Impagliazzo, Generic oracles and oracle classes, in: 28th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), IEEE, 1987, pp. 118–126.
[7]
Cornelissen, Arjan; Mande, Nikhil S.; Patro, Subhasree (2022): Improved quantum query upper bounds based on classical decision trees. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.02968.
[8]
Yogesh Dahiya, Meena Mahajan, On (simple) decision tree rank, in: 41st IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2021), in: LIPIcs, vol. 213, 2021.
[9]
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht, David Haussler, Learning decision trees from random examples, Inf. Comput. 82 (3) (1989) 231–246.
[10]
Javier Esparza, Michael Luttenberger, Maximilian Schlund, A brief history of Strahler numbers, in: Language and Automata Theory and Applications - 8th International Conference LATA, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8370, Springer, 2014, pp. 1–13.
[11]
Juan Luis Esteban, Jacobo Torán, A combinatorial characterization of treelike resolution space, Inf. Process. Lett. 87 (6) (2003) 295–300.
[12]
Juris Hartmanis, Lane A. Hemachandra, One-way functions and the nonisomorphism of NP-complete sets, Theor. Comput. Sci. 81 (1) (1991) 155–163.
[13]
Stasys Jukna, Boolean Function Complexity - Advances and Frontiers, Algorithms and Combinatorics, vol. 27, Springer, 2012.
[14]
Stasys Jukna, A. Razborov, Petr Savicky, Ingo Wegener, On P versus NP ∩ co-NP for decision trees and read-once branching programs, Comput. Complex. 8 (4) (1999) 357–370.
[15]
Adam R. Klivans, Rocco A. Servedio, Learning DNF in time 2 õ ( n 1 / 3 ), J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 68 (2) (2004) 303–318.
[16]
Alexander Knop, Shachar Lovett, Sam McGuire, Weiqiang Yuan, Guest column: models of computation between decision trees and communication, ACM SIGACT News 52 (2) (2021) 46–70.
[17]
Alexander Knop, Shachar Lovett, Sam McGuire, Weiqiang Yuan, Log-rank and lifting for and-functions, in: Proceedings of the 53rd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2021, pp. 197–208.
[18]
Oliver Kullmann, Investigating a general hierarchy of polynomially decidable classes of CNF's based on short tree-like resolution proofs, Electron. Colloq. Comput. Complex. 41 (1999).
[19]
Eyal Kushilevitz, Noam Nisan, Communication Complexity, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
[20]
Nikhil S. Mande, Swagato Sanyal, On parity decision trees for Fourier-sparse Boolean functions, in: Nitin Saxena, Sunil Simon (Eds.), 40th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, in: LIPIcs, vol. 182, FSTTCS 2020, December 14-18, 2020, BITS Pilani, K K Birla Goa Campus, Goa, India (Virtual Conference), Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2020.
[21]
Ashley Montanaro, A composition theorem for decision tree complexity, Chic. J. Theor. Comput. Sci. 2014 (6) (July 2014).
[22]
Ryan O'Donnell, Analysis of Boolean Functions, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[23]
Pavel Pudlák, Russell Impagliazzo, A lower bound for DLL algorithms for k-SAT (preliminary version), in: Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms SODA, 2000, pp. 128–136.
[24]
Amir Shpilka, Avishay Tal, Ben lee Volk, On the structure of Boolean functions with small spectral norm, Comput. Complex. 26 (1) (2017) 229–273.
[25]
Gábor Tardos, Query complexity, or why is it difficult to separate NP A ∩ coNP A from P A by random oracles A?, Combinatorica 9 (4) (1989) 385–392.
[26]
György Turán, Farrokh Vatan, Linear decision lists and partitioning algorithms for the construction of neural networks, in: Foundations of Computational Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1997, pp. 414–423.
[27]
Kei Uchizawa, Eiji Takimoto, Lower bounds for linear decision trees with bounded weights, in: 41st International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science SOFSEM, in: LNCS, vol. 8939, Springer, 2015, pp. 412–422.
[28]
G. Valiant Leslie, A theory of the learnable, Commun. ACM 27 (11) (1984) 1134–1142.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Theoretical Computer Science
Theoretical Computer Science  Volume 978, Issue C
Nov 2023
202 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd.

United Kingdom

Publication History

Published: 02 November 2023

Author Tags

  1. Boolean functions
  2. Decision trees
  3. Query complexity
  4. Rank
  5. Certificate complexity
  6. Sparsity
  7. Iterated composition

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 14 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media