Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2311.11663

On Hardness Assumptions Needed for "Extreme High-End'' PRGs and Fast Derandomization

Abstract

The hardness vs.~randomness paradigm aims to explicitly construct pseudorandom generators $G:\{0,1\}^r \rightarrow \{0,1\}^m$ that fool circuits of size $m$, assuming the existence of explicit hard functions. A ``high-end PRG'' with seed length $r=O(\log m)$ (implying BPP=P) was achieved in a seminal work of Impagliazzo and Wigderson (STOC 1997), assuming the high-end hardness assumption: there exist constants $0<β< 1< B$, and functions computable in time $2^{B \cdot n}$ that cannot be computed by circuits of size $2^{β\cdot n}$. Recently, motivated by fast derandomization of randomized algorithms, Doron et al.~(FOCS 2020) and Chen and Tell (STOC 2021), construct ``extreme high-end PRGs'' with seed length $r=(1+o(1))\cdot \log m$, under qualitatively stronger assumptions. We study whether extreme high-end PRGs can be constructed from the following scaled version of the assumption which we call ``the extreme high-end hardness assumption'', and in which $β=1-o(1)$ and $B=1+o(1)$. We give a partial negative answer, showing that certain approaches cannot yield a black-box proof. (A longer abstract with more details appears in the PDF file)

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ronen Shaltiel, Emanuele Viola. 2023-11-20. On Hardness Assumptions Needed for "Extreme High-End'' PRGs and Fast Derandomization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.11663

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