Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1911.12520

Schur Polynomials do not have small formulas if the Determinant doesn't!

Abstract

Schur Polynomials are families of symmetric polynomials that have been classically studied in Combinatorics and Algebra alike. They play a central role in the study of Symmetric functions, in Representation theory [Sta99], in Schubert calculus [LM10] as well as in Enumerative combinatorics [Gas96, Sta84, Sta99]. In recent years, they have also shown up in various incarnations in Computer Science, e.g, Quantum computation [HRTS00, OW15] and Geometric complexity theory [IP17]. However, unlike some other families of symmetric polynomials like the Elementary Symmetric polynomials, the Power Symmetric polynomials and the Complete Homogeneous Symmetric polynomials, the computational complexity of syntactically computing Schur polynomials has not been studied much. In particular, it is not known whether Schur polynomials can be computed efficiently by algebraic formulas. In this work, we address this question, and show that unless \emph{every} polynomial with a small algebraic branching program (ABP) has a small algebraic formula, there are Schur polynomials that cannot be computed by algebraic formula of polynomial size. In other words, unless the algebraic complexity class $\mathrm{VBP}$ is equal to the complexity class $\mathrm{VF}$, there exist Schur polynomials which do not have polynomial size algebraic formulas. As a consequence of our proof, we also show that computing the determinant of certain \emph{generalized} Vandermonde matrices is essentially as hard as computing the general symbolic determinant. To the best of our knowledge, these are one of the first hardness results of this kind for families of polynomials which are not \emph{multilinear}. A key ingredient of our proof is the study of composition of \emph{well behaved} algebraically independent polynomials with a homogeneous polynomial, and might be of independent interest.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Prasad Chaugule, Mrinal Kumar, Nutan Limaye, Chandra Kanta Mohapatra, Adrian She, Srikanth Srinivasan. 2019-11-28. Schur Polynomials do not have small formulas if the Determinant doesn't!. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.12520

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