Determinants vs. Algebraic Branching Programs

被引:0
|
作者
Chatterjee, Abhranil [1 ]
Kumar, Mrinal [2 ]
Volk, Ben Lee [3 ]
机构
[1] Indian Stat Inst, Kolkata, India
[2] Tata Inst Fundamental Res, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
[3] Reichman Univ, Efi Arazi Sch Comp Sci, Herzliyya, Israel
基金
以色列科学基金会;
关键词
Determinant; Algebraic Branching Program; Lower Bounds; Singular Variety; PERMANENT; COMPLEXITY;
D O I
10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2024.27
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
We show that for every homogeneous polynomial of degree d, if it has determinantal complexity at most s, then it can be computed by a homogeneous algebraic branching program (ABP) of size at most O(d(5)s). Moreover, we show that for most homogeneous polynomials, the width of the resulting homogeneous ABP is just s - 1 and the size is at most O(ds). Thus, for constant degree homogeneous polynomials, their determinantal complexity and ABP complexity are within a constant factor of each other and hence, a super-linear lower bound for ABPs for any constant degree polynomial implies a super-linear lower bound on determinantal complexity; this relates two open problems of great interest in algebraic complexity. As of now, super-linear lower bounds for ABPs are known only for polynomials of growing degree [ 9, 6], and for determinantal complexity the best lower bounds are larger than the number of variables only by a constant factor [10]. While determinantal complexity and ABP complexity are classically known to be polynomially equivalent [13], the standard transformation from the former to the latter incurs a polynomial blow up in size in the process, and thus, it was unclear if a super-linear lower bound for ABPs implies a super-linear lower bound on determinantal complexity. In particular, a size preserving transformation from determinantal complexity to ABPs does not appear to have been known prior to this work, even for constant degree polynomials.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Lower bounds for the sum of small-size algebraic branching programs
    Bhargav, C.S.
    Dwivedi, Prateek
    Saxena, Nitin
    Theoretical Computer Science, 2025, 1041
  • [22] An abstract interpretation perspective on linear vs. branching time
    Ranzato, F
    Tapparo, F
    PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS, PROCEEDINGS, 2005, 3780 : 69 - 85
  • [23] Algebraic connections vs. algebraic D-modules: inverse and direct images
    Cailotto, Maurizio
    Fiorot, Luisa
    PORTUGALIAE MATHEMATICA, 2009, 66 (03) : 303 - 320
  • [24] Localization vs. identification of semi-algebraic sets
    Ben-David, S
    Lindenbaum, M
    MACHINE LEARNING, 1998, 32 (03) : 207 - 224
  • [25] Localization vs. Identification of Semi-Algebraic Sets
    Shai Ben-David
    Michael Lindenbaum
    Machine Learning, 1998, 32 : 207 - 224
  • [26] Deterministic Black-Box Identity Testing π-Ordered Algebraic Branching Programs
    Jansen, Maurice
    Qiao, Youming
    Sarma, Jayalal M. N.
    IARCS ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON FOUNDATIONS OF SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY AND THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE (FSTTCS 2010), 2010, 8 : 296 - 307
  • [27] Deterministic black-box identity testing π-ordered algebraic branching programs
    Jansen, Maurice
    Qiao, Youming
    Jayalal Sarma, M.N.
    Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, LIPIcs, 2010, 8 : 296 - 307
  • [28] BRANCHING PROGRAMS VERSUS OBLIVIOUS BRANCHING PROGRAMS
    HROMKOVIC, J
    COMPUTERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 1991, 10 (01): : 67 - 74
  • [29] PROGRAMS VS. RESOURCES Some Options for the Navy
    O'Rourke, Ronald
    NAVAL WAR COLLEGE REVIEW, 2010, 63 (04) : 25 - 37
  • [30] Peripheral vs. central determinants of vibrotactile adaptation
    Klocker, A.
    Gueorguiev, D.
    Thonnard, J. L.
    Mouraux, A.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2016, 115 (02) : 685 - 691