Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1808.07199

New Bounds for Energy Complexity of Boolean Functions

Abstract

$\newcommand{\EC}{\mathsf{EC}}\newcommand{\KW}{\mathsf{KW}}\newcommand{\DT}{\mathsf{DT}}\newcommand{\psens}{\mathsf{psens}} \newcommand{\calB}{\cal B} $ For a Boolean function $f:\{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ computed by a circuit $C$ over a finite basis $\mathcal{B}$, the energy complexity of $C$ (denoted by $\EC_{\calB}(C)$) is the maximum over all inputs $\{0,1\}^n$ the numbers of gates of the circuit $C$ (excluding the inputs) that output a one. Energy Complexity of a Boolean function over a finite basis $\calB$ denoted by $\EC_\calB(f):= \min_C \EC_{\calB}(C)$ where $C$ is a circuit over $\calB$ computing $f$. We study the case when $\calB = \{\land_2, \lor_2, \lnot\}$, the standard Boolean basis. It is known that any Boolean function can be computed by a circuit (with potentially large size) with an energy of at most $3n(1+ε(n))$ for a small $ ε(n)$(which we observe is improvable to $3n-1$). We show several new results and connections between energy complexity and other well-studied parameters of Boolean functions. * For all Boolean functions $f$, $\EC(f) \le O(\DT(f)^3)$ where $\DT(f)$ is the optimal decision tree depth of $f$. * We define a parameter \textit{positive sensitivity} (denoted by $\psens$), a quantity that is smaller than sensitivity and defined in a similar way, and show that for any Boolean circuit $C$ computing a Boolean function $f$, $ \EC(C) \ge \psens(f)/3$. * For a monotone function $f$, we show that $\EC(f) = Ω(\KW^+(f))$ where $\KW^+(f)$ is the cost of monotone Karchmer-Wigderson game of $f$. * Restricting the above notion of energy complexity to Boolean formulas, we show $\EC(F) = Ω\left (\sqrt{L(F)}-depth(F)\right )$ where $L(F)$ is the size and $depth(F)$ is the depth of a formula $F$.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Krishnamoorthy Dinesh, Samir Otiv, Jayalal Sarma. 2020-09-12. New Bounds for Energy Complexity of Boolean Functions. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2020.09.003

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Bit-counting complexity classes

We define bit-counting complexity classes whose membership depends on the binary profile of the number of accepting paths of non-deterministic polynomial time Turing machines. We study the relationship between this new family of complexity classes and the classical complexity classes. We prove that the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ is contained in our comparison based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}$, ${\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}$. We then show that the comparison based bit-counting complexity classes and the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ are Turing equivalent, that is ${\bf P}^{\bf PP} = {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}}$. We then prove that the complexity classes ${\bf NP}$ and ${\bf CoNP}$ are contained in both of our parity based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}$. We also show that the Turing closures of the parity based bit-counting complexity classes coincide, that is ${\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|\oplus}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1|\oplus}P}}$. We do this by proving that when either parity based bit-counting complexity class is provided as an oracle for a polynomial time Turing machine, then it can simulate the other one, that is ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}}$ and ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}}$.

cs.CC

Formalizing PARITY Circuit Lower Bounds in Lean

We formalize Hastad's PARITY lower bound in Lean using the switching lemma. For every fixed d >= 2, formulas and DAG circuits of computation depth at most d computing PARITY on n inputs require size exp(Omega_d(n^(1/(d-1)))) for all sufficiently large n. This matches the classical upper bound up to constants in the exponent and implies that PARITY is not in nonuniform AC0. We also construct a polynomial-size, logarithmic-depth bounded-fan-in formula family for PARITY, providing a witness to NC1 is not a subset of AC0 for the formalized models. The Lean source code is available at https://github.com/formalcs/circuit-complexity and is checked with Lean 4.33.1 and mathlib 4.33.1.

cs.CC

Constant-Coin Complete-Information Debates for $\mathsf{P}$ with Arbitrarily Small Strong Error

We study complete-information debate systems in which a probabilistic finite-state verifier reads the alternating messages of a prover and a refuter. Demirci, Say, and Yakaryılmaz showed that every language in $\mathsf{P}$ has such debates checkable with a constant number of random bits and arbitrarily small weak error. Their strong-error construction, which also counts nontermination as failure, did not permit arbitrary error reduction. We close this gap: for every $L\in\mathsf{P}$ and every $\varepsilon>0$, there is a constant-space verifier using a constant number of private coin tosses that has perfect completeness and strong error at most $\varepsilon$. The verifier simulates a polynomial-time alternating multihead finite automaton, privately spot-checking one of its input heads. The key observation is that, on a nonmember, the refuter may concede any round in which the prover first misreports a head reading. This ensures termination against every prover when the refuter follows the specified strategy, and permits strong-error reduction by repetition.

cs.CC