Hardness Amplification: Towards Direct Product Decoding & Testing

Hardness Amplication: Towards Direct Product Decoding & Testing
Sagnik Mukhopadhyay
School of Technology & Computer Science Tata Institute of Fundamental Research sagnik m@tcs.tifr.res.in
April 5, 2012
Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)
DP Decoding & Testing
April 5, 2012
1 / 34
Prologue Hardness Amplication
April 5, 2012
2 / 34
What is a hard function?
We will assume non-uniform paradigm, i.e., specically boolean circuit.
April 5, 2012
3 / 34
We will assume non-uniform paradigm, i.e., specically boolean circuit. A function is hard if it is hard to compute on all the instances by a circuit of certain size.
April 5, 2012
3 / 34
-average case hardness of f [Havg ]: Largest S such that all circuits C os size at most S Pr[C (x) = f (x)] < x
April 5, 2012
3 / 34
1 Worst case hardness of f = Havg
April 5, 2012
3 / 34
1 Worst case hardness of f = Havg Havg Havg O(2n /n).
April 5, 2012
3 / 34
Yaos XOR Lemma: Simplied [Yao82]

Take a function f : {0, 1}n {1, +1}.
April 5, 2012
4 / 34

Consider its k-wise product f k : {0, 1}nk {1, +1}k dened as: f k (x1 , ..., xk ) = f (x1 ), ..., f (xk )
April 5, 2012
4 / 34

No small circuit can compute f in more than (1 ) fraction of input space
No smaller circuit can compute f k in more than space.
1+ 2
fraction of input
April 5, 2012
4 / 34

No small circuit can compute f in more than (1 ) fraction of input space
No smaller circuit can compute f k in more than space. Proof via Impagliazzos Hardcore Set Lemma.
1+ 2
fraction of input
April 5, 2012
4 / 34
Direct Product
Denition [Impagliazzo 02, Trevisan 03]

For f : U R, the k-wise direct product f k : U k Rk is f k (x1 , ..., xk ) = f (x1 ), ..., f (xk )
April 5, 2012
5 / 34
Direct Product
Denition [Impagliazzo 02, Trevisan 03]

For f : U R, the k-wise direct product f k : U k Rk is f k (x1 , ..., xk ) = f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) Distance is bad.
April 5, 2012
5 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard.
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard. No feasible algorithm can compute f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) correctly even with small probability.
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard. No feasible algorithm can compute f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) correctly even with small probability. xi chosen independently, uniformly at random.
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard. No feasible algorithm can compute f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) correctly even with small probability. xi chosen independently, uniformly at random. Derandomized version: xi chosen pseudo-randomly.
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard. No feasible algorithm can compute f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) correctly even with small probability. xi chosen independently, uniformly at random. Derandomized version: xi chosen pseudo-randomly. Error increases in the latter case.
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
Direct Product
DP Theorem
Start with f which is mildly average case hard. No feasible algorithm can compute f (x1 ), ..., f (xk ) correctly even with small probability. xi chosen independently, uniformly at random. Derandomized version: xi chosen pseudo-randomly. Error increases in the latter case. Well known in non-uniform model, e.g., boolean circuit
April 5, 2012
6 / 34
DP Code: Two basic paradigm
Decoding
Given C : U k Rk and C f k , nd f . Hardness Amplication
April 5, 2012
7 / 34
Decoding
Testing
Given C : U k Rk , test if C f k for some f : U k Rk PCP construction
April 5, 2012
7 / 34
Decoding
Testing
Given C : U k Rk , test if C f k for some f : U k Rk PCP construction
April 5, 2012
7 / 34
Part I Uniform Direct Product Decoding
April 5, 2012
8 / 34
Uniform DP Theorem
BPP/log: Class of probabilistic polytime algorithm with advice length O(log n), advise depends on random coin tosses.
April 5, 2012
9 / 34
Uniform DP Theorem
Theorem
f is -hard for BPTIME(poly t(nk))/ log t(nk) f k is (1 )-hard for BPTIME(poly t(n))/ log t(n), where e O() .
April 5, 2012
9 / 34
Uniform DP Theorem
Theorem
f is -hard for BPTIME(poly t(nk))/ log t(nk) f k is (1 )-hard for BPTIME(poly t(n))/ log t(n), where e O() . Proof via reconstruction theorem.
April 5, 2012
9 / 34
Uniform DP Theorem
Theorem
f is -hard for BPTIME(poly t(nk))/ log t(nk) f k is (1 )-hard for BPTIME(poly t(n))/ log t(n), where e O() . Proof via reconstruction theorem.
Theorem
There is a probabilistic algorithm A such that C -computes f k Given C A will output C with probability () which (1 ) computes f A is a uniform randomized NC 0 algorithm. C is AC 0 circuit.
Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR) DP Decoding & Testing April 5, 2012 9 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2
Dene randomized circuit CA,v : Fix s = k/2.
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2
Dene randomized circuit CA,v : Fix s = k/2. A is a s-subset of {0, 1}n .
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2
Dene randomized circuit CA,v : Fix s = k/2. A is a s-subset of {0, 1}n . v = (v1 , .., vs ) is an s-bit string.
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2
Dene randomized circuit CA,v : Fix s = k/2. A is a s-subset of {0, 1}n . v = (v1 , .., vs ) is an s-bit string. On input x, check x A.
If YES, output vi
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2

If YES, output vi otherwise, sample B such that A {x} B consistent on A
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2

If YES, output vi otherwise, sample B such that A {x} B consistent on A if found, output C (B)|x
April 5, 2012
10 / 34
Structure of C
x
B1
B2

If YES, output vi otherwise, sample B such that A {x} B consistent on A if found, output C (B)|x
Do it for 100(ln 1/)/ times and if such B not found output default answer.
Algorithm A
Pick a random k-set B and an s-subset A B Set v = C (B)|A Output CA,v
April 5, 2012
11 / 34
Part II Direct Product Testing
April 5, 2012
12 / 34
DP Testing Problem
Given C : U k Rk , test whether C is close to some f k .
April 5, 2012
13 / 34
DP Testing Problem
Given C : U k Rk , test whether C is close to some f k . DP Test makes some queries to C and nds it out.
April 5, 2012
13 / 34
DP Testing Problem
Given C : U k Rk , test whether C is close to some f k . DP Test makes some queries to C and nds it out. Goal: Minimize number of queries.
April 5, 2012
13 / 34
DP Testing Problem
Given C : U k Rk , test whether C is close to some f k . DP Test makes some queries to C and nds it out. Goal: Minimize number of queries. Minimize acceptance probability.
April 5, 2012
13 / 34
DP Testing Problem
Given C : U k Rk , test whether C is close to some f k . DP Test makes some queries to C and nds it out. Goal: Minimize number of queries. Minimize acceptance probability.
April 5, 2012
13 / 34
Idea: Consistency test
Query C on dierent sets and check consistency on common values.
April 5, 2012
14 / 34
Query C on dierent sets and check consistency on common values. Ideally, if C f k , then this check always holds.
April 5, 2012
14 / 34
Query C on dierent sets and check consistency on common values. Ideally, if C f k , then this check always holds. What if not?
April 5, 2012
14 / 34
Query C on dierent sets and check consistency on common values. Ideally, if C f k , then this check always holds. What if not? We need list decoding. C might agree with 1/ f k s, each within fractions of {0, 1}nk .
April 5, 2012
14 / 34
V-Test[DR06, DG08]
Pick two random k-sets S1 = (A, B1 ) and S2 = (A, B2 ) with m = elements in A.
April 5, 2012
15 / 34
V-Test[DR06, DG08]
Pick two random k-sets S1 = (A, B1 ) and S2 = (A, B2 ) with m = elements in A. Check if C (S1 )|A = C (S2 )|A .
April 5, 2012
15 / 34
V-Test[DR06, DG08]
Pick two random k-sets S1 = (A, B1 ) and S2 = (A, B2 ) with m = elements in A. Check if C (S1 )|A = C (S2 )|A .
April 5, 2012
15 / 34
V-Test & Z-Test
B1
B2
B1
A1
A
B2 A2
V-test
Z-Test
April 5, 2012
16 / 34
V-Test Theorem
April 5, 2012
17 / 34
V-Test Theorem
Theorem
If V-Test accepts with probability > 1/k (1) , then there exists an f : U R such that C f k on at least fraction of k-sets.
1/4
April 5, 2012
17 / 34
V-Test Theorem
Theorem
If V-Test accepts with probability > 1/k (1) , then there exists an f : U R such that C f k on at least fraction of k-sets. Note: V-test does not work if 1/k (1) [DG08]
1/4
April 5, 2012
17 / 34
V-Test Theorem
Theorem
If V-Test accepts with probability > 1/k (1) , then there exists an f : U R such that C f k on at least fraction of k-sets. Note: V-test does not work if 1/k (1) [DG08] So whats the solution for lower acceptance probability?
1/4
April 5, 2012
17 / 34
Solution: Z-Test[IKW09]
Pick three random k-sets S1 = (B1 , A1 ), S2 = (A1 , B2 ), S3 = (B2 , A2 ) with m = k elements in A1 , A2 .
April 5, 2012
18 / 34
Solution: Z-Test[IKW09]
Pick three random k-sets S1 = (B1 , A1 ), S2 = (A1 , B2 ), S3 = (B2 , A2 ) with m = k elements in A1 , A2 . Check if

C (S1 )|A1 = C (S2 )|A1 C (S2 )|B2 = C (S3 )|B2
April 5, 2012
18 / 34
Derandomized Z-Test
Let k = q d for some prime q and U = Fm . q
April 5, 2012
19 / 34
Derandomized Z-Test
For d0 = d/25, pick a random d0 dimensional subspace A0 and random d d0 dimensional subspace B0 linearly independent from A0 .
April 5, 2012
19 / 34
Derandomized Z-Test
For d0 = d/25, pick a random d0 dimensional subspace A0 and random d d0 dimensional subspace B0 linearly independent from A0 . Pick a random d d0 dimensional subspace B1 linearly independent from A0 . If C (A0 + B0 )|A0 = C (A0 + B1 )|A0
then proceed.
April 5, 2012
19 / 34
Derandomized Z-Test
then proceed. Pick a random d0 dimensional subspace A1 linearly independent from B1 . If C (A0 + B1 )|B1 = C (A1 + B1 )|B1 then accept.
April 5, 2012
19 / 34
Derandomized Z-Test
then proceed. Pick a random d0 dimensional subspace A1 linearly independent from B1 . If C (A0 + B1 )|B1 = C (A1 + B1 )|B1 then accept.
April 5, 2012
19 / 34
Z-Test Theorem
Theorem
If Z-Test accepts with probability > e k f : U R such that
1/4 C
(1)
, then there exists an
f k on at least fraction of k-sets.
April 5, 2012
20 / 34
Z-Test Theorem
Theorem
If Z-Test accepts with probability > e k f : U R such that
1/4 C
(1)
, then there exists an
f k on at least fraction of k-sets.
Theorem
If derandomized Z-Test accepts with probability > k (1) , then there exists an f : U R such that C f k on at least /4 fraction of d-dimensional subspaces of U .
1/4
April 5, 2012
20 / 34
Part III Proof Idea: Flower Analysis
April 5, 2012
21 / 34
Denitions
Flower: Determined by S = (A, B). Core: A. Core Value: v = C (A, B)|A Petals: ConsA,B = {(A, B )|C (A, B )|A = v }
B1 B B2
B3
B4 A
April 5, 2012
22 / 34
V-Test Flower Structure

Suppose V-test accepts with probability at least
April 5, 2012
23 / 34

Suppose V-test accepts with probability at least We can show Flowers are large: There are many (/2) large owers, i.e., having at least /2 petals.
April 5, 2012
23 / 34

Suppose V-test accepts with probability at least We can show Flowers are large: There are many (/2) large owers, i.e., having at least /2 petals. Large owers are harmonious: In every large ower, almost all pairs of petals are near perfectly consistent.
E B1 B B2
B3
B4 A
April 5, 2012
23 / 34
V-Test: Harmonious owers

Theorem
For random B1 = (E , D1 ) adn B2 = (E , D2 ) [|E | = |A|]
E ,D1 ,D2 >
Pr [B1 , B2 ConsA0 ,B0 , C (A0 , B1 )|E = C (A0 , B2 )|E ] <
where = poly () and = poly (1/k) Such (A0 , B0 ) is called excellent petal.
April 5, 2012
24 / 34

Theorem
E ,D1 ,D2 >
Proof.
Pick a random (A0 , B0 ) which passes V-test with probability at least .
April 5, 2012
24 / 34

Theorem
E ,D1 ,D2 >
Proof.
Pick a random (A0 , B0 ) which passes V-test with probability at least . We can show that the ower determined by (A0 , B) is large.
April 5, 2012
24 / 34

Theorem
E ,D1 ,D2 >
Proof.
Pick a random (A0 , B0 ) which passes V-test with probability at least . We can show that the ower determined by (A0 , B) is large. For a large ower, petals are harmonious with high probability. [Cherno bound]
April 5, 2012
24 / 34
Implication: Excellence implies local agreement

Consider a ower determined by an excellent petal (A, B).
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Consider a ower determined by an excellent petal (A, B). x U \A0 dene g as g (x) = PluralityB Cons(A0 ,B0 ) :xB C (A, B )|x
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
Proof.
Consider otherwise.
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
Proof.
Consider otherwise. Then, a random petal B1 has many minority elements x where C (A, B1 )|x = g (x).
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
Proof.
Consider otherwise. Then, a random petal B1 has many minority elements x where C (A, B1 )|x = g (x). Reduce scope: A random subset E of B1 also has many minority elements. [Cherno]
April 5, 2012
25 / 34

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
Proof.
Consider otherwise. Then, a random petal B1 has many minority elements x where C (A, B1 )|x = g (x). Reduce scope: A random subset E of B1 also has many minority elements. [Cherno] Show random E , there are many B2 which agree with g . [Denition of g and sampling proparties]

Then,
B Cons(A0 ,B0 )
Pr
[C (A, B )|B = g (B )]
O()
Proof.
Consider otherwise. Then, a random petal B1 has many minority elements x where C (A, B1 )|x = g (x). Reduce scope: A random subset E of B1 also has many minority elements. [Cherno] Show random E , there are many B2 which agree with g . [Denition of g and sampling proparties]
What we have so far?

We have an approximate unique decoding of each large ower.
April 5, 2012
26 / 34

We have an approximate unique decoding of each large ower. How do we glue them?
April 5, 2012
26 / 34

We have an approximate unique decoding of each large ower. How do we glue them? We cannot, in certain cases.
April 5, 2012
26 / 34

Example
For each k-set S pick a representative element x S. For each such x, pick a random function gx .
k Dene C (S) = gx (S)
C (S1 )|A = C (S2 )|A i xS1 = xS2 V-test passes with high probability m/k 2 but no global g .
April 5, 2012
26 / 34

Example
For each k-set S pick a representative element x S. For each such x, pick a random function gx .
k Dene C (S) = gx (S)
C (S1 )|A = C (S2 )|A i xS1 = xS2 V-test passes with high probability m/k 2 but no global g . No global g if < 1/k 2
April 5, 2012
26 / 34
Local to Global Dp: Z-Test
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k)
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k) Let (A, B) is randomly chosen in rst step of the test.
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k) Let (A, B) is randomly chosen in rst step of the test. Can assume ower (A, B) is large.[As V test didnt reject]
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k) Let (A, B) is randomly chosen in rst step of the test. Can assume ower (A, B) is large.[As V test didnt reject] Hence (A, B) is excellent have a g [plurality function].
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k) Let (A, B) is randomly chosen in rst step of the test. Can assume ower (A, B) is large.[As V test didnt reject] Hence (A, B) is excellent have a g [plurality function]. Pick (A , B ) [First pick random k-set S, then chose random subset B S]
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Suppose Z test accepts with probability at least > e (k) Let (A, B) is randomly chosen in rst step of the test. Can assume ower (A, B) is large.[As V test didnt reject] Hence (A, B) is excellent have a g [plurality function]. Pick (A , B ) [First pick random k-set S, then chose random subset B S] B ConsA,B , hence g (S) cannot be very dierent from C (S).
April 5, 2012
27 / 34
Epilogue 2-Query PCP & New Parallel Repetition Theorem
April 5, 2012
28 / 34
What is PCP?
We will assume the hardness of approximation view of PCP.
Denition
There exists < 1 such that for every L NP there is a polynomial-time function f mapping strings to (representations of) 3CNF formulas such that x L val (f (x)) = 1 x L val (f (x)) < /
April 5, 2012
29 / 34
What is PCP?
We will assume the hardness of approximation view of PCP.
Denition
There exists < 1 such that for every L NP there is a polynomial-time function f mapping strings to (representations of) 3CNF formulas such that x L val (f (x)) = 1 x L val (f (x)) < /
Example
Graph CSP A grah CSP over alphabet : Given graph G = (V , E ) on n nodes and edge constrains Ce : 2 {0, 1}
Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR) DP Decoding & Testing
Is there an assignment f : V that satises all edge constrains.

April 5, 2012 29 / 34
2-query PCP
Clearly, For some constant < 1, it is NP hard to distinguish between satisable graph CSP. -satisable graph CSP.
April 5, 2012
30 / 34
2-query PCP
Clearly, For some constant < 1, it is NP hard to distinguish between satisable graph CSP. -satisable graph CSP.
Denition
2-query PCP: Completeness 1. Soundness < . PCP proof: assignment f : V Verier: Accept if f satises a random edge.
April 5, 2012
30 / 34
Decreasing Soundness by Repetition
Sequential repetition:

soundness k queries: 2k
April 5, 2012
31 / 34
Decreasing Soundness by Repetition
Sequential repetition:

soundness k queries: 2k soundness k queries: 2
Parallel repetition:

April 5, 2012
31 / 34
Idea: DP-test of PCP proof
Given F : V k k , test if F = f k .
April 5, 2012
32 / 34
Given F : V k k , test if F = f k .
If F is close to f k , we get exponential decay in soundness.
April 5, 2012
32 / 34
Given F : V k k , test if F = f k . Combine tests to minimize query.
If F is close to f k , we get exponential decay in soundness.
April 5, 2012
32 / 34
Summary
Hardness amplication: Yaos XOR lemma in nonuniform setting.
April 5, 2012
33 / 34
Summary
Hardness amplication: Yaos XOR lemma in nonuniform setting. DP decoding and testing: We need 3 queries and exponentially small success probability.
April 5, 2012
33 / 34
Summary
Hardness amplication: Yaos XOR lemma in nonuniform setting. DP decoding and testing: We need 3 queries and exponentially small success probability. PCP: 2-prover parallel k-repetition for restricted games with exponential in k decrease in soundness.
April 5, 2012
33 / 34
Thank you! Questions?
April 5, 2012
34 / 34

Hardness Amplification: Towards Direct Product Decoding & Testing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hardness Amplification: Towards Direct Product Decoding & Testing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hardness Amplication: Towards Direct Product Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Prologue Hardness Amplication

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

What is a hard function?

We will assume non-uniform paradigm, i.e., specically boolean circuit.

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

What is a hard function?

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

What is a hard function?

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

What is a hard function?

1 Worst case hardness of f = Havg

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

What is a hard function?

1 Worst case hardness of f = Havg Havg Havg O(2n /n).

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Yaos XOR Lemma: Simplied [Yao82]

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Yaos XOR Lemma: Simplied [Yao82]

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Yaos XOR Lemma: Simplied [Yao82]

No small circuit can compute f in more than (1 ) fraction of input space

No smaller circuit can compute f k in more than space.

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Yaos XOR Lemma: Simplied [Yao82]

No small circuit can compute f in more than (1 ) fraction of input space

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Denition [Impagliazzo 02, Trevisan 03]

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Denition [Impagliazzo 02, Trevisan 03]

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

DP Code: Two basic paradigm

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing

DP Code: Two basic paradigm

Sagnik Mukhopadhyay (STCS TIFR)

DP Decoding & Testing