Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2411.07966

Feasibly Constructive Proof of Schwartz-Zippel Lemma and the Complexity of Finding Hitting Sets

Abstract

The Schwartz-Zippel Lemma states that if a low-degree multivariate polynomial with coefficients in a field is not zero everywhere in the field, then it has few roots on every finite subcube of the field. This fundamental fact about multivariate polynomials has found many applications in algorithms, complexity theory, coding theory, and combinatorics. We give a new proof of the lemma that offers some advantages over the standard proof. First, the new proof is more constructive than previously known proofs. For every given side-length of the cube, the proof constructs a polynomial-time computable and polynomial-time invertible surjection onto the set of roots in the cube. The domain of the surjection is tight, thus showing that the set of roots on the cube can be compressed. Second, the new proof can be formalised in Buss' bounded arithmetic theory $\mathrm{S}^1_2$ for polynomial-time reasoning. One consequence of this is that the theory $\mathrm{S}^1_2 + \mathrm{dWPHP(PV)}$ for approximate counting can prove that the problem of verifying polynomial identities (PIT) can be solved by polynomial-size circuits. The same theory can also prove the existence of small hitting sets for any explicitly described class of polynomials of polynomial degree. To complete the picture we show that the existence of such hitting sets is \emph{equivalent} to the surjective weak pigeonhole principle $\mathrm{dWPHP(PV)}$, over the theory $\mathrm{S}^1_2$. This is a contribution to a line of research studying the reverse mathematics of computational complexity. One consequence of this is that the problem of constructing small hitting sets for such classes is complete for the class APEPP of explicit construction problems whose totality follows from the probabilistic method. This class is also known and studied as the class of Range Avoidance Problems.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Albert Atserias, Iddo Tzameret. 2024-11-12. Feasibly Constructive Proof of Schwartz-Zippel Lemma and the Complexity of Finding Hitting Sets. https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07966

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Improved Algorithms for the Remote Point Problem

The Remote Point Problem (RPP) is an algorithmic problem that asks, given a linear subspace $L \subseteq \mathbb{F}^n$ of dimension $k$, to deterministically find a vector $v \in \mathbb{F}^n$ far in Hamming distance from $L$. This problem was introduced by Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], motivated in part by the matrix rigidity approach for proving circuit lower bounds. An algorithm is said to achieve remoteness $d$ if it finds a vector $v$ whose Hamming distance from $L$ is at least $d$. We observe that over the rational numbers, the problem admits a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm that achieves optimal remoteness $n-k$. Over finite fields, we obtain a (modest) improvement of a result of Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], and give an algorithm that achieves remoteness $Ω\left(\frac{n}{\max\{k, \log n\}} \log n\right)$.

cs.CC

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

Geometric Complexity Theory and Graph Isomorphism

We investigate ideas from the Geometric Complexity Theory approach to separating complexity classes (Mulmuley & Sohoni, SIAM J. Comput., 2001) in the setting of graph isomorphism. This provides us a playground of finite combinatorial objects on which to explore these techniques. We seek to separate non-isomorphic pairs of graphs using vector spaces of polynomials that are set-wise invariant under permutations (so-called separating modules). We characterize the power of this method for distinguishing graphs under several different complexity measures: - We show that separating modules of "support-degree" $k$ are equivalent in power to the counts of $O(k)$-vertex subgraphs. - We show that separating modules of symmetric algebraic circuit size $n^{Θ(k)}$ are equivalent to $Θ(k)$-dimensional Weisfeiler-Leman. This generalizes and strengthens the result of Dawar & Wilsenach (CSL '18; ICALP '20; ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 2022; Theory Comput., 2025). - When considering only the representation-theoretic multiplicities of separating modules, we show that two graphs are separated by multiplicities if and only if their automorphism groups have different multiplicity of cycle types (cycle index). The latter result is notable in the analogy with GCT, as it is the only result we are aware of in which the multiplicity approach to separating isomorphism types of objects has been given an "intrinsic" characterization in terms of the objects themselves. We show that for graphs, multiplicity obstructions are stronger than occurrence obstructions. We also connect support size (from the study of WL) to complexity measures on $S_n$ (Dafni, Filmus, Lifshitz, Lindzey, & Vinyals, ITCS '21); as well as connections between invariant polynomials, the Graph Reconstruction Conjectures, and Forman's "invariants of finite type" (Adv. Math., 2004).

cs.CC