CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 13 May 15, 2017
|
|
- Wilfred Hopkins
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 13 May 15, 2017
2 Relationship to other classes To compare to classes of decision problems, usually consider P #P which is a decision class easy: NP, conp P #P easy: P #P PSPACE Toda s Theorem (homework): PH P #P. May 15,
3 Relationship to other classes Question: is #P hard because it entails finding NP witnesses? or is counting difficult by itself? May 15,
4 Bipartite Matchings Definition: G = (U, V, E) bipartite graph with U = V a perfect matching in G is a subset M E that touches every node, and no two edges in M share an endpoint May 15,
5 Bipartite Matchings Definition: G = (U, V, E) bipartite graph with U = V a perfect matching in G is a subset M E that touches every node, and no two edges in M share an endpoint May 15,
6 Bipartite Matchings #MATCHING: given a bipartite graph G = (U, V, E) how many perfect matchings does it have? Theorem: #MATCHING is #P-complete. But can find a perfect matching in polynomial time! counting itself must be difficult May 15,
7 Cycle Covers Claim: 1-1 correspondence between cycle covers in G and perfect matchings in G #MATCHING and #CYCLE-COVER parsimoniously reducible to each other G = (U, V, E) May 15, G = (V, E ) 3 4
8 Cycle Covers cycle cover: collection of node-disjoint directed cycles that touch every node #CYCLE-COVER: given directed graph G = (V, E) how many cycle covers does it have? Theorem: #CYCLE-COVER is #P-complete. implies #MATCHING is #P-complete May 15,
9 Cycle Cover is #P-complete variable gadget: every cycle cover includes left cycle or right cycle clause gadget: cycle cover cannot use all three outer edges and each of 7 ways to exclude at least one gives exactly 1 cover using those external edges May 15, x i x i
10 Cycle Cover is #P-complete May 15,
11 Cycle Cover is #P-complete May 15,
12 Cycle Cover is #P-complete clause gadget corresponding to (A B C) has xor gadget between outer 3 edges and A, B, C u v xor v u A A B B xor gadget ensures that exactly one of two edges can be in cover C C May 15,
13 Cycle Cover is #P-complete Proof outline (reduce from #SAT) ( x 1 x 2 x 3 ) ( x 3 x 1 ) (x 3 x 2 ) xor gadgets (exactly 1 of two edges is in cover)... clause gadgets x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 N.B. must avoid reducing SAT to MATCHING! variable gadgets May 15,
14 Cycle Cover is #P-complete Introduce edge weights cycle cover weight is product of weights of its edges implement xor gadget by weight of cycle cover that obeys xor multiplied by 4 (mod N) weight of cycle cover that violates xor multiplied by N large integer May 15,
15 Cycle Cover is #P-complete Weighted xor gadget: N-1 u v xor v u weight of cycle cover that obeys xor multiplied by 4 (mod N) weight of cycle cover that violates xor multiplied by N u v (unlabeled weights are 1) N-1 N v u May 15,
16 Cycle Cover is #P-complete Simulating positive edge weights need to handle 2, 3, 4, 5,, N k k times 3 May 15,
17 Cycle Cover is #P-complete ( x 1 x 2 x 3 ) ( x 3 x 1 ) (x 3 x 2 ) xor gadget (exactly 1 of two edges is in cover)... clause gadget variable gadgets: x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 m = # xor gadgets; n = # variables; N > 4 m 2 n # covers (mod N) = (4 m ) (#sat. assignments) May 15,
18 New Topic proof systems interactive proofs and their power Arthur-Merlin games May 15,
19 Proof systems L = { (A, 1 k ) : A is a true mathematical assertion with a proof of length k} What is a proof? complexity insight: meaningless unless can be efficiently verified May 15,
20 Proof systems given language L, goal is to prove x L proof system for L is a verification algorithm V completeness: x L 9 proof, V accepts (x, proof) true assertions have proofs soundness: x L 8 proof*, V rejects (x, proof*) false assertions have no proofs efficiency: 8 x, proof: V(x, proof) runs in polynomial time in x May 15,
21 Classical Proofs previous definition: recall: classical proof system L NP iff expressible as L = { x 9y, y < x k, (x, y) R } and R P. NP is the set of languages with classical proof systems (R is the verifier) May 15,
22 Interactive Proofs Two new ingredients: randomness: verifier tosses coins, errs with some small probability interaction: rather than reading proof, verifier interacts with computationally unbounded prover NP proof systems lie in this framework: prover sends proof, verifier does not use randomness May 15,
23 Interactive Proofs interactive proof system for L is an interactive protocol (P, V) Prover common input: x Verifier... # rounds = poly( x ) accept/ reject May 15,
24 Interactive Proofs interactive proof system for L is an interactive protocol (P, V) completeness: x L Pr[V accepts in (P, V)(x)] 2/3 soundness: x L 8 P* Pr[V accepts in (P*, V)(x)] 1/3 efficiency: V is p.p.t. machine repetition: can reduce error to any ε May 15,
25 Interactive Proofs IP = {L : L has an interactive proof system} Observations/questions: philosophically interesting: captures more broadly what it means to be convinced a statement is true clearly NP IP. Potentially larger. How much larger? if larger, randomness is essential (why?) May 15,
26 Graph Isomorphism graphs G 0 = (V, E 0 ) and G 1 = (V, E 1 ) are isomorphic (G 0 G 1 ) if exists a permutation π:v V for which (x, y) E 0 (π(x), π(y)) E May 15,
27 Graph Isomorphism GI = {(G 0, G 1 ) : G 0 G 1 } in NP not known to be in P, or NP-complete GNI = complement of GI not known to be in NP Theorem (GMW): GNI IP indication IP may be more powerful than NP May 15,
28 GNI in IP interactive proof system for GNI: Prover if H G 0 r = 0, else r = 1 input: (G 0, G 1 ) H = π(g c ) r Verifier flip coin c {0,1}; pick random π accept iff r = c May 15,
29 GNI in IP completeness: if G 0 not isomorphic to G 1 then H is isomorphic to exactly one of (G 0, G 1 ) prover will choose correct r soundness: if G 0 G 1 then prover sees same distribution on H for c = 0, c = 1 no information on c any prover P* can succeed with probability at most 1/2 May 15,
30 The power of IP We showed GNI 2 IP GNI IP suggests IP more powerful than NP, since we don t know how to show GNI in NP GNI in conp Theorem (LFKN): conp IP May 15,
31 The power of IP Proof idea: input: φ(x 1, x 2,, x n ) prover: I claim φ has k satisfying assignments true iff φ(0, x 2,, x n ) has k 0 satisfying assignments φ(1, x 2,, x n ) has k 1 satisfying assignments k = k 0 + k 1 prover sends k 0, k 1 verifier sends random c {0,1} prover recursively proves φ = φ(c, x 2,, x n ) has k c satisfying assignments at end, verifier can check for itself. May 15,
32 The power of IP Analysis of proof idea: Completeness: φ(x 1, x 2,, x n ) has k satisfying assignments accept with prob. 1 Soundness: φ(x 1, x 2,, x n ) does not have k satisfying assigns. accept prob n Why? It is possible that k is only off by one; verifier only catches prover if coin flips c are successive bits of this assignment May 15,
33 The power of IP Solution to problem (ideas): replace {0,1} n with (F q ) n verifier substitutes random field element at each step vast majority of field elements catch cheating prover (rather than just 1) Theorem: L = { (φ, k): CNF φ has exactly k satisfying assignments} is in IP May 15,
34 The power of IP First step: arithmetization transform φ(x 1, x n ) into polynomial p φ (x 1, x 2, x n ) of degree d over a field F q ; q prime > 2 n recursively: x i x i φ (1 - p φ ) φ φ (p φ )(p φ ) φ φ 1 - (1 - p φ )(1 - p φ ) for all x {0,1} n we have p φ (x) = φ(x) degree d φ can compute p φ (x) in poly time from φ and x May 15,
35 The power of IP Prover wishes to prove: k = Σ x1 = 0, 1 Σ x 2 = 0,1 Σ xn = 0, 1 p φ (x 1, x 2,, x n ) Define: k z = Σ x2 = 0,1 Σ xn = 0, 1 p φ (z, x 2,, x n ) prover sends: k z for all z F q verifier: checks that k 0 + k 1 = k sends random z F q continue with proof that k z = Σ x2 = 0,1 Σ xn = 0, 1 p φ (z, x 2,, x n ) at end: verifier checks for itself May 15,
36 The power of IP Prover wishes to prove: k = Σ x1 = 0, 1 Σ x 2 = 0,1 Σ xn = 0, 1 p φ (x 1, x 2,, x n ) Define: k z = Σ x2 = 0,1 Σ xn = 0, 1 p φ (z, x 2,, x n ) a problem: can t send k z for all z F q solution: send the polynomial! recall degree d φ May 15,
37 The actual protocol input: (φ, k) Prover p 1 (x) p 1 (x) = Σ x2,,x n {0,1} p φ (x, x 2,, x n ) p 2 (x) = Σ x3,,x n {0,1} p φ (z 1, x, x 3,, x n ) p 2 (x) z 2 z 1 Verifier p 1 (0)+p 1 (1)=k? pick random z 1 in F q p 2 (0)+p 2 (1)=p 1 (z 1 )? pick random z 2 in F q p 3 (x) = Σ x4,,x n {0,1} p φ (z 1, z 2, x, x 4, x n ) p 3 (x) p 3 (0)+p 3 (1)=p 2 (z 2 )?. pick random z 3 in F q. p n (x) p n (0)+p n (1)=p n-1 (z n-1 )? p n (z n ) = p φ (z 1, z 2,, z n )? pick random z n in F q May 15,
38 Analysis of protocol Completeness: if (φ, k) L then honest prover on previous slide will always cause verifier to accept May 15,
39 Analysis of protocol Soundness: let p i (x) be the correct polynomials let p i *(x) be the polynomials sent by (cheating) prover (φ, k) L p 1 (0) + p 1 (1) k either p 1 *(0) + p 1 *(1) k (and V rejects) or p 1 * p 1 Pr z1 [p 1 *(z 1 ) = p 1 (z 1 )] d/q φ /2 n assume (p i+1 (0)+p i+1 (1)= ) p i (z i ) p i *(z i ) either p i+1 *(0) + p i+1 *(1) p i *(z i ) (and V rejects) or p i+1 * p i+1 Pr zi+1 [p i+1 *(z i+1 ) = p i+1 (z i+1 )] φ /2 n May 15,
40 Analysis of protocol Soundness (continued): if verifier does not reject, there must be some i for which: p i * p i and yet p i *(z i ) = p i (z i ) for each i, probability is φ /2 n union bound: probability that there exists an i for which the bad event occurs is n φ /2 n poly(n)/2 n << 1/3 May 15,
41 Analysis of protocol Conclude: L = { (φ, k): CNF φ has exactly k satisfying assignments} is in IP L is conp-hard, so conp IP Question remains: NP, conp IP. Potentially larger. How much larger? May 15,
42 IP = PSPACE Theorem: (Shamir) IP = PSPACE Note: IP PSPACE enumerate all possible interactions, explicitly calculate acceptance probability interaction extremely powerful! An implication: you can interact with master player of Generalized Geography and determine if she can win from the current configuration even if you do not have the power to compute optimal moves! May 15,
CS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 14 May 17, 2017
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 14 May 17, 2017 IP = PSPACE Theorem: (Shamir) IP = PSPACE Note: IP PSPACE enumerate all possible interactions, explicitly calculate acceptance probability interaction extremely
More informationLecture Notes 17. Randomness: The verifier can toss coins and is allowed to err with some (small) probability if it is unlucky in its coin tosses.
CS 221: Computational Complexity Prof. Salil Vadhan Lecture Notes 17 March 31, 2010 Scribe: Jonathan Ullman 1 Interactive Proofs ecall the definition of NP: L NP there exists a polynomial-time V and polynomial
More informationNotes on Complexity Theory Last updated: November, Lecture 10
Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated: November, 2015 Lecture 10 Notes by Jonathan Katz, lightly edited by Dov Gordon. 1 Randomized Time Complexity 1.1 How Large is BPP? We know that P ZPP = RP corp
More information2 Evidence that Graph Isomorphism is not NP-complete
Topics in Theoretical Computer Science April 11, 2016 Lecturer: Ola Svensson Lecture 7 (Notes) Scribes: Ola Svensson Disclaimer: These notes were written for the lecturer only and may contain inconsistent
More informationLecture 12: Interactive Proofs
princeton university cos 522: computational complexity Lecture 12: Interactive Proofs Lecturer: Sanjeev Arora Scribe:Carl Kingsford Recall the certificate definition of NP. We can think of this characterization
More informationIntroduction to Interactive Proofs & The Sumcheck Protocol
CS294: Probabilistically Checkable and Interactive Proofs January 19, 2017 Introduction to Interactive Proofs & The Sumcheck Protocol Instructor: Alessandro Chiesa & Igor Shinkar Scribe: Pratyush Mishra
More informationLecture 26: Arthur-Merlin Games
CS 710: Complexity Theory 12/09/2011 Lecture 26: Arthur-Merlin Games Instructor: Dieter van Melkebeek Scribe: Chetan Rao and Aaron Gorenstein Last time we compared counting versus alternation and showed
More informationLecture 19: Interactive Proofs and the PCP Theorem
Lecture 19: Interactive Proofs and the PCP Theorem Valentine Kabanets November 29, 2016 1 Interactive Proofs In this model, we have an all-powerful Prover (with unlimited computational prover) and a polytime
More informationCS21 Decidability and Tractability
CS21 Decidability and Tractability Lecture 20 February 23, 2018 February 23, 2018 CS21 Lecture 20 1 Outline the complexity class NP NP-complete probelems: Subset Sum NP-complete problems: NAE-3-SAT, max
More informationCS 282A/MATH 209A: Foundations of Cryptography Prof. Rafail Ostrovsky. Lecture 9
CS 282A/MATH 209A: Foundations of Cryptography Prof. Rafail Ostrovsky Lecture 9 Lecture date: March 7-9, 2005 Scribe: S. Bhattacharyya, R. Deak, P. Mirzadeh 1 Interactive Proof Systems/Protocols 1.1 Introduction
More informationInteractive Proofs 1
CS294: Probabilistically Checkable and Interactive Proofs January 24, 2017 Interactive Proofs 1 Instructor: Alessandro Chiesa & Igor Shinkar Scribe: Mariel Supina 1 Pspace IP The first proof that Pspace
More informationLimits to Approximability: When Algorithms Won't Help You. Note: Contents of today s lecture won t be on the exam
Limits to Approximability: When Algorithms Won't Help You Note: Contents of today s lecture won t be on the exam Outline Limits to Approximability: basic results Detour: Provers, verifiers, and NP Graph
More informationLecture 17: Interactive Proof Systems
Computational Complexity Theory, Fall 2010 November 5 Lecture 17: Interactive Proof Systems Lecturer: Kristoffer Arnsfelt Hansen Scribe: Søren Valentin Haagerup 1 Interactive Proof Systems Definition 1.
More informationComplexity Theory. Jörg Kreiker. Summer term Chair for Theoretical Computer Science Prof. Esparza TU München
Complexity Theory Jörg Kreiker Chair for Theoretical Computer Science Prof. Esparza TU München Summer term 2010 2 Lecture 15 Public Coins and Graph (Non)Isomorphism 3 Intro Goal and Plan Goal understand
More informationLecture Notes 20: Zero-Knowledge Proofs
CS 127/CSCI E-127: Introduction to Cryptography Prof. Salil Vadhan Fall 2013 Lecture Notes 20: Zero-Knowledge Proofs Reading. Katz-Lindell Ÿ14.6.0-14.6.4,14.7 1 Interactive Proofs Motivation: how can parties
More information-bit integers are all in ThC. Th The following problems are complete for PSPACE NPSPACE ATIME QSAT, GEOGRAPHY, SUCCINCT REACH.
CMPSCI 601: Recall From Last Time Lecture 26 Theorem: All CFL s are in sac. Facts: ITADD, MULT, ITMULT and DIVISION on -bit integers are all in ThC. Th The following problems are complete for PSPACE NPSPACE
More informationLecture 22: Oct 29, Interactive proof for graph non-isomorphism
E0 4 Computational Complexity Theory Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore Fall 04 Department of Computer Science and Automation Lecture : Oct 9, 04 Lecturer: Chandan Saha
More informationLecture Hardness of Set Cover
PCPs and Inapproxiability CIS 6930 October 5, 2009 Lecture Hardness of Set Cover Lecturer: Dr. My T. Thai Scribe: Ying Xuan 1 Preliminaries 1.1 Two-Prover-One-Round Proof System A new PCP model 2P1R Think
More informationComplexity Theory. Jörg Kreiker. Summer term Chair for Theoretical Computer Science Prof. Esparza TU München
Complexity Theory Jörg Kreiker Chair for Theoretical Computer Science Prof. Esparza TU München Summer term 2010 Lecture 16 IP = PSPACE 3 Goal and Plan Goal IP = PSPACE Plan 1. PSPACE IP by showing QBF
More information1 Recap: Interactive Proofs
Theoretical Foundations of Cryptography Lecture 16 Georgia Tech, Spring 2010 Zero-Knowledge Proofs 1 Recap: Interactive Proofs Instructor: Chris Peikert Scribe: Alessio Guerrieri Definition 1.1. An interactive
More informationNotes for Lecture 25
U.C. Berkeley CS276: Cryptography Handout N25 Luca Trevisan April 23, 2009 Notes for Lecture 25 Scribed by Alexandra Constantin, posted May 4, 2009 Summary Today we show that the graph isomorphism protocol
More information2 Natural Proofs: a barrier for proving circuit lower bounds
Topics in Theoretical Computer Science April 4, 2016 Lecturer: Ola Svensson Lecture 6 (Notes) Scribes: Ola Svensson Disclaimer: These notes were written for the lecturer only and may contain inconsistent
More informationZero-Knowledge Proofs and Protocols
Seminar: Algorithms of IT Security and Cryptography Zero-Knowledge Proofs and Protocols Nikolay Vyahhi June 8, 2005 Abstract A proof is whatever convinces me. Shimon Even, 1978. Zero-knowledge proof is
More informationGreat Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science
15-251 Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science Lecture 28: A Computational Lens on Proofs December 6th, 2016 Evolution of proof First there was GORM GORM = Good Old Regular Mathematics Pythagoras s
More informationUmans Complexity Theory Lectures
Umans Complexity Theory Lectures Lecture 12: The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy Oracle Turing Machines Oracle Turing Machine (OTM): Deterministic multitape TM M with special query tape special states q?, q
More informationNon-Interactive ZK:The Feige-Lapidot-Shamir protocol
Non-Interactive ZK: The Feige-Lapidot-Shamir protocol April 20, 2009 Remainders FLS protocol Definition (Interactive proof system) A pair of interactive machines (P, V ) is called an interactive proof
More informationRational Proofs with Multiple Provers. Jing Chen, Samuel McCauley, Shikha Singh Department of Computer Science
Rational Proofs with Multiple Provers Jing Chen, Samuel McCauley, Shikha Singh Department of Computer Science Outline of the Talk RATIONAL INTERACTIVE PROOFS with MULTI-PROVERs Interactive Proofs [GMR,
More informationCSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity
CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity Interactive Proofs John E. Savage Brown University April 20, 2009 John E. Savage (Brown University) CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity April 20, 2009
More informationLecture 3: Interactive Proofs and Zero-Knowledge
CS 355 Topics in Cryptography April 9, 2018 Lecture 3: Interactive Proofs and Zero-Knowledge Instructors: Henry Corrigan-Gibbs, Sam Kim, David J. Wu So far in the class, we have only covered basic cryptographic
More information6.841/18.405J: Advanced Complexity Wednesday, April 2, Lecture Lecture 14
6.841/18.405J: Advanced Complexity Wednesday, April 2, 2003 Lecture Lecture 14 Instructor: Madhu Sudan In this lecture we cover IP = PSPACE Interactive proof for straightline programs. Straightline program
More informationLecture 26. Daniel Apon
Lecture 26 Daniel Apon 1 From IPPSPACE to NPPCP(log, 1): NEXP has multi-prover interactive protocols If you ve read the notes on the history of the PCP theorem referenced in Lecture 19 [3], you will already
More informationTheorem 11.1 (Lund-Fortnow-Karloff-Nisan). There is a polynomial length interactive proof for the
Lecture 11 IP, PH, and PSPACE May 4, 2004 Lecturer: Paul Beame Notes: Daniel Lowd 11.1 IP and PH Theorem 11.1 (Lund-Fortnow-Karloff-Nisan). There is a polynomial length interactive proof for the predicate
More informationLecture : PSPACE IP
IITM-CS6845: Theory Toolkit February 16, 2012 Lecture 22-23 : PSPACE IP Lecturer: Jayalal Sarma.M.N. Scribe: Sivaramakrishnan.N.R. Theme: Between P and PSPACE 1 Interactive Protocol for #SAT In the previous
More informationLecture 15: Interactive Proofs
COM S 6830 Cryptography Tuesday, October 20, 2009 Instructor: Rafael Pass Lecture 15: Interactive Proofs Scribe: Chin Isradisaikul In this lecture we discuss a new kind of proofs that involves interaction
More informationCS151 Complexity Theory. Lecture 15 May 22, 2017
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 15 New topic(s) Optimization problems, Approximation Algorithms, and Probabilistically Checkable Proofs Optimization Problems many hard problems (especially NP-hard) are
More informationFrom Secure MPC to Efficient Zero-Knowledge
From Secure MPC to Efficient Zero-Knowledge David Wu March, 2017 The Complexity Class NP NP the class of problems that are efficiently verifiable a language L is in NP if there exists a polynomial-time
More informationCS154, Lecture 18: 1
CS154, Lecture 18: 1 CS 154 Final Exam Wednesday December 12, 12:15-3:15 pm STLC 111 You re allowed one double-sided sheet of notes Exam is comprehensive (but will emphasize post-midterm topics) Look for
More informationLecture 23: More PSPACE-Complete, Randomized Complexity
6.045 Lecture 23: More PSPACE-Complete, Randomized Complexity 1 Final Exam Information Who: You On What: Everything through PSPACE (today) With What: One sheet (double-sided) of notes are allowed When:
More informationInteractive Proofs. Merlin-Arthur games (MA) [Babai] Decision problem: D;
Interactive Proofs n x: read-only input finite σ: random bits control Π: Proof work tape Merlin-Arthur games (MA) [Babai] Decision problem: D; input string: x Merlin Prover chooses the polynomial-length
More informationCS 151 Complexity Theory Spring Solution Set 5
CS 151 Complexity Theory Spring 2017 Solution Set 5 Posted: May 17 Chris Umans 1. We are given a Boolean circuit C on n variables x 1, x 2,..., x n with m, and gates. Our 3-CNF formula will have m auxiliary
More informationPOLYNOMIAL SPACE QSAT. Games. Polynomial space cont d
T-79.5103 / Autumn 2008 Polynomial Space 1 T-79.5103 / Autumn 2008 Polynomial Space 3 POLYNOMIAL SPACE Polynomial space cont d Polynomial space-bounded computation has a variety of alternative characterizations
More informationInteractive Proof System
Interactive Proof System We have seen interactive proofs, in various disguised forms, in the definitions of NP, OTM, Cook reduction and PH. We will see that interactive proofs have fundamental connections
More informationLecture 14: IP = PSPACE
IAS/PCMI Summer Session 2000 Clay Mathematics Undergraduate Program Basic Course on Computational Complexity Lecture 14: IP = PSPACE David Mix Barrington and Alexis Maciel August 3, 2000 1. Overview We
More informationArthur-Merlin Streaming Complexity
Weizmann Institute of Science Joint work with Ran Raz Data Streams The data stream model is an abstraction commonly used for algorithms that process network traffic using sublinear space. A data stream
More informationInteractive protocols & zero-knowledge
Interactive protocols & zero-knowledge - interactive protocols formalize what can be recognized by polynomial time restricted verifiers in arbitrary protocols - generalizes NP - zero-knowledge formalizes
More information198:538 Complexity of Computation Lecture 16 Rutgers University, Spring March 2007
198:538 Complexity of Computation Lecture 16 Rutgers University, Spring 2007 8 March 2007 In this lecture we discuss Shamir s theorem that PSPACE is the set of languages that have interactive proofs with
More informationLecture 5. 1 Review (Pairwise Independence and Derandomization)
6.842 Randomness and Computation September 20, 2017 Lecture 5 Lecturer: Ronitt Rubinfeld Scribe: Tom Kolokotrones 1 Review (Pairwise Independence and Derandomization) As we discussed last time, we can
More information6.840 Language Membership
6.840 Language Membership Michael Bernstein 1 Undecidable INP Practice final Use for A T M. Build a machine that asks EQ REX and then runs M on w. Query INP. If it s in P, accept. Note that the language
More informationUmans Complexity Theory Lectures
Umans Complexity Theory Lectures Lecture 8: Introduction to Randomized Complexity: - Randomized complexity classes, - Error reduction, - in P/poly - Reingold s Undirected Graph Reachability in RL Randomized
More information6.896 Quantum Complexity Theory 30 October Lecture 17
6.896 Quantum Complexity Theory 30 October 2008 Lecturer: Scott Aaronson Lecture 17 Last time, on America s Most Wanted Complexity Classes: 1. QMA vs. QCMA; QMA(2). 2. IP: Class of languages L {0, 1} for
More informationLecture 18: Zero-Knowledge Proofs
COM S 6810 Theory of Computing March 26, 2009 Lecture 18: Zero-Knowledge Proofs Instructor: Rafael Pass Scribe: Igor Gorodezky 1 The formal definition We intuitively defined an interactive proof to be
More informationMTAT Complexity Theory December 8th, Lecture 12
MTAT.07.004 Complexity Theory December 8th, 2011 Lecturer: Peeter Laud Lecture 12 Scribe(s): Ilya Kuzovkin Introduction On the previous lecture we had a look onto interactive proofs, where the system consists
More informationLecture 20: PSPACE. November 15, 2016 CS 1010 Theory of Computation
Lecture 20: PSPACE November 15, 2016 CS 1010 Theory of Computation Recall that PSPACE = k=1 SPACE(nk ). We will see that a relationship between time and space complexity is given by: P NP PSPACE = NPSPACE
More informationInteractive protocols & zero-knowledge
Interactive protocols & zero-knowledge - interactive protocols formalize what can be recognized by polynomial time restricted verifiers in arbitrary protocols - generalizes NP - zero-knowledge formalizes
More informationQMA(2) workshop Tutorial 1. Bill Fefferman (QuICS)
QMA(2) workshop Tutorial 1 Bill Fefferman (QuICS) Agenda I. Basics II. Known results III. Open questions/next tutorial overview I. Basics I.1 Classical Complexity Theory P Class of problems efficiently
More informationTheory of Computation Chapter 12: Cryptography
Theory of Computation Chapter 12: Cryptography Guan-Shieng Huang Dec. 20, 2006 0-0 Introduction Alice wants to communicate with Bob secretely. x Alice Bob John Alice y=e(e,x) y Bob y??? John Assumption
More informationMore NP-Complete Problems
CS 473: Algorithms, Spring 2018 More NP-Complete Problems Lecture 23 April 17, 2018 Most slides are courtesy Prof. Chekuri Ruta (UIUC) CS473 1 Spring 2018 1 / 57 Recap NP: languages/problems that have
More informationLecture 8 (Notes) 1. The book Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach by Sanjeev Arora and Boaz Barak;
Topics in Theoretical Computer Science April 18, 2016 Lecturer: Ola Svensson Lecture 8 (Notes) Scribes: Ola Svensson Disclaimer: These notes were written for the lecturer only and may contain inconsistent
More informationAlgorithm Design and Analysis
Algorithm Design and Analysis LECTURE 26 Computational Intractability Polynomial Time Reductions Sofya Raskhodnikova S. Raskhodnikova; based on slides by A. Smith and K. Wayne L26.1 What algorithms are
More informationLecture 11: Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge II. 1 Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge in the Hidden-Bits Model for the Graph Hamiltonian problem
CS 276 Cryptography Oct 8, 2014 Lecture 11: Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge II Instructor: Sanjam Garg Scribe: Rafael Dutra 1 Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge in the Hidden-Bits Model for the Graph Hamiltonian
More informationAdvanced Algorithms (XIII) Yijia Chen Fudan University
Advanced Algorithms (XIII) Yijia Chen Fudan University The PCP Theorem Theorem NP = PCP(log n, 1). Motivation Approximate solutions Definition (Approximation of MAX-3SAT) For every 3CNF formula ϕ, the
More information1 Agenda. 2 History. 3 Probabilistically Checkable Proofs (PCPs). Lecture Notes Definitions. PCPs. Approximation Algorithms.
CS 221: Computational Complexity Prof. Salil Vadhan Lecture Notes 20 April 12, 2010 Scribe: Jonathan Pines 1 Agenda. PCPs. Approximation Algorithms. PCPs = Inapproximability. 2 History. First, some history
More informationNotes on Zero Knowledge
U.C. Berkeley CS172: Automata, Computability and Complexity Handout 9 Professor Luca Trevisan 4/21/2015 Notes on Zero Knowledge These notes on zero knowledge protocols for quadratic residuosity are based
More information9. PSPACE. PSPACE complexity class quantified satisfiability planning problem PSPACE-complete
9. PSPACE PSPACE complexity class quantified satisfiability planning problem PSPACE-complete Lecture slides by Kevin Wayne Copyright 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley Copyright 2013 Kevin Wayne http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~wayne/kleinberg-tardos
More informationIntro to Theory of Computation
Intro to Theory of Computation LECTURE 25 Last time Class NP Today Polynomial-time reductions Adam Smith; Sofya Raskhodnikova 4/18/2016 L25.1 The classes P and NP P is the class of languages decidable
More information1 More finite deterministic automata
CS 125 Section #6 Finite automata October 18, 2016 1 More finite deterministic automata Exercise. Consider the following game with two players: Repeatedly flip a coin. On heads, player 1 gets a point.
More informationComplete problems for classes in PH, The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy (PH) oracle is like a subroutine, or function in
Oracle Turing Machines Nondeterministic OTM defined in the same way (transition relation, rather than function) oracle is like a subroutine, or function in your favorite PL but each call counts as single
More informationLecture 21: Counting and Sampling Problems
princeton univ. F 14 cos 521: Advanced Algorithm Design Lecture 21: Counting and Sampling Problems Lecturer: Sanjeev Arora Scribe: Today s topic of counting and sampling problems is motivated by computational
More informationLecture 10: Zero-Knowledge Proofs
Lecture 10: Zero-Knowledge Proofs Introduction to Modern Cryptography Benny Applebaum Tel-Aviv University Fall Semester, 2011 12 Some of these slides are based on note by Boaz Barak. Quo vadis? Eo Romam
More informationStrong ETH Breaks With Merlin and Arthur. Or: Short Non-Interactive Proofs of Batch Evaluation
Strong ETH Breaks With Merlin and Arthur Or: Short Non-Interactive Proofs of Batch Evaluation Ryan Williams Stanford Two Stories Story #1: The ircuit and the Adversarial loud. Given: a 1,, a K F n Want:
More informationCS 282A/MATH 209A: Foundations of Cryptography Prof. Rafail Ostrovsky. Lecture 10
CS 282A/MATH 209A: Foundations of Cryptography Prof. Rafail Ostrovsky Lecture 10 Lecture date: 14 and 16 of March, 2005 Scribe: Ruzan Shahinian, Tim Hu 1 Oblivious Transfer 1.1 Rabin Oblivious Transfer
More informationNP-Completeness. Algorithmique Fall semester 2011/12
NP-Completeness Algorithmique Fall semester 2011/12 1 What is an Algorithm? We haven t really answered this question in this course. Informally, an algorithm is a step-by-step procedure for computing a
More informationChapter 9. PSPACE: A Class of Problems Beyond NP. Slides by Kevin Wayne Pearson-Addison Wesley. All rights reserved.
Chapter 9 PSPACE: A Class of Problems Beyond NP Slides by Kevin Wayne. Copyright @ 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley. All rights reserved. 1 Geography Game Geography. Alice names capital city c of country she
More informationReal Interactive Proofs for VPSPACE
Brandenburgische Technische Universität, Cottbus-Senftenberg, Germany Colloquium Logicum Hamburg, September 2016 joint work with M. Baartse 1. Introduction Blum-Shub-Smale model of computability and complexity
More informationCS Communication Complexity: Applications and New Directions
CS 2429 - Communication Complexity: Applications and New Directions Lecturer: Toniann Pitassi 1 Introduction In this course we will define the basic two-party model of communication, as introduced in the
More informationPCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation
PCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation An Introduction Lee Carraher and Ryan McGovern Department of Computer Science University of Cincinnati October 27, 2003 Introduction Assuming NP P, there are many
More informationINAPPROX APPROX PTAS. FPTAS Knapsack P
CMPSCI 61: Recall From Last Time Lecture 22 Clique TSP INAPPROX exists P approx alg for no ε < 1 VertexCover MAX SAT APPROX TSP some but not all ε< 1 PTAS all ε < 1 ETSP FPTAS Knapsack P poly in n, 1/ε
More informationProbabilistically Checkable Arguments
Probabilistically Checkable Arguments Yael Tauman Kalai Microsoft Research yael@microsoft.com Ran Raz Weizmann Institute of Science ran.raz@weizmann.ac.il Abstract We give a general reduction that converts
More informationLecture 22: Counting
CS 710: Complexity Theory 4/8/2010 Lecture 22: Counting Instructor: Dieter van Melkebeek Scribe: Phil Rydzewski & Chi Man Liu Last time we introduced extractors and discussed two methods to construct them.
More informationLecture 24: Randomized Complexity, Course Summary
6.045 Lecture 24: Randomized Complexity, Course Summary 1 1/4 1/16 1/4 1/4 1/32 1/16 1/32 Probabilistic TMs 1/16 A probabilistic TM M is a nondeterministic TM where: Each nondeterministic step is called
More informationApproximate Verification
Approximate Verification Michel de Rougemont Université de Paris-II Ekaterinenburg-April 2014 i ii Contents 1 Probabilistic Classes 3 1.1 Probabilistic decision classes...................................
More informationCPSC 467: Cryptography and Computer Security
CPSC 467: Cryptography and Computer Security Michael J. Fischer Lecture 19 November 8, 2017 CPSC 467, Lecture 19 1/37 Zero Knowledge Interactive Proofs (ZKIP) ZKIP for graph isomorphism Feige-Fiat-Shamir
More informationLecture 18: PCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation I
Lecture 18: and Hardness of Approximation I Arijit Bishnu 26.04.2010 Outline 1 Introduction to Approximation Algorithm 2 Outline 1 Introduction to Approximation Algorithm 2 Approximation Algorithm Approximation
More informationCryptography CS 555. Topic 23: Zero-Knowledge Proof and Cryptographic Commitment. CS555 Topic 23 1
Cryptography CS 555 Topic 23: Zero-Knowledge Proof and Cryptographic Commitment CS555 Topic 23 1 Outline and Readings Outline Zero-knowledge proof Fiat-Shamir protocol Schnorr protocol Commitment schemes
More informationCOP 4531 Complexity & Analysis of Data Structures & Algorithms
COP 4531 Complexity & Analysis of Data Structures & Algorithms Lecture 18 Reductions and NP-completeness Thanks to Kevin Wayne and the text authors who contributed to these slides Classify Problems According
More information9. PSPACE 9. PSPACE. PSPACE complexity class quantified satisfiability planning problem PSPACE-complete
Geography game Geography. Alice names capital city c of country she is in. Bob names a capital city c' that starts with the letter on which c ends. Alice and Bob repeat this game until one player is unable
More informationClassical Verification of Quantum Computations
Classical Verification of Quantum Computations Urmila Mahadev UC Berkeley September 12, 2018 Classical versus Quantum Computers Can a classical computer verify a quantum computation? Classical output (decision
More informationCryptographic Protocols Notes 2
ETH Zurich, Department of Computer Science SS 2018 Prof. Ueli Maurer Dr. Martin Hirt Chen-Da Liu Zhang Cryptographic Protocols Notes 2 Scribe: Sandro Coretti (modified by Chen-Da Liu Zhang) About the notes:
More informationSpace and Nondeterminism
CS 221 Computational Complexity, Lecture 5 Feb 6, 2018 Space and Nondeterminism Instructor: Madhu Sudan 1 Scribe: Yong Wook Kwon Topic Overview Today we ll talk about space and non-determinism. For some
More informationUmans Complexity Theory Lectures
New topic(s) Umans Complexity Theory Lectures Lecture 15: Approximation Algorithms and Probabilistically Checable Proos (PCPs) Optimization problems,, and Probabilistically Checable Proos 2 Optimization
More informationLecture Notes CS:5360 Randomized Algorithms Lecture 20 and 21: Nov 6th and 8th, 2018 Scribe: Qianhang Sun
1 Probabilistic Method Lecture Notes CS:5360 Randomized Algorithms Lecture 20 and 21: Nov 6th and 8th, 2018 Scribe: Qianhang Sun Turning the MaxCut proof into an algorithm. { Las Vegas Algorithm Algorithm
More information8. INTRACTABILITY I. Lecture slides by Kevin Wayne Copyright 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley. Last updated on 2/6/18 2:16 AM
8. INTRACTABILITY I poly-time reductions packing and covering problems constraint satisfaction problems sequencing problems partitioning problems graph coloring numerical problems Lecture slides by Kevin
More informationShamir s Theorem. Johannes Mittmann. Technische Universität München (TUM)
IP = PSPACE Shamir s Theorem Johannes Mittmann Technische Universität München (TUM) 4 th Joint Advanced Student School (JASS) St. Petersburg, April 2 12, 2006 Course 1: Proofs and Computers Johannes Mittmann
More informationLecture 11: Proofs, Games, and Alternation
IAS/PCMI Summer Session 2000 Clay Mathematics Undergraduate Program Basic Course on Computational Complexity Lecture 11: Proofs, Games, and Alternation David Mix Barrington and Alexis Maciel July 31, 2000
More informationSession 4: Efficient Zero Knowledge. Yehuda Lindell Bar-Ilan University
Session 4: Efficient Zero Knowledge Yehuda Lindell Bar-Ilan University 1 Proof Systems Completeness: can convince of a true statement Soundness: cannot convince for a false statement Classic proofs: Written
More informationStanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Handout 8 Luca Trevisan 4/21/2010
Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Handout 8 Luca Trevisan 4/2/200 Counting Problems Today we describe counting problems and the class #P that they define, and we show that every counting
More informationInteractive PCP. Yael Tauman Kalai Georgia Institute of Technology Ran Raz Weizmann Institute of Science
Interactive PCP Yael Tauman Kalai Georgia Institute of Technology yael@csail.mit.edu Ran Raz Weizmann Institute of Science ran.raz@weizmann.ac.il Abstract A central line of research in the area of PCPs
More informationSOLUTION: SOLUTION: SOLUTION:
Convert R and S into nondeterministic finite automata N1 and N2. Given a string s, if we know the states N1 and N2 may reach when s[1...i] has been read, we are able to derive the states N1 and N2 may
More informationNP-Complete Reductions 2
x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 4 x 4 12 22 32 CS 447 11 13 21 23 31 33 Algorithms NP-Complete Reductions 2 Prof. Gregory Provan Department of Computer Science University College Cork 1 Lecture Outline NP-Complete
More information