Pseudorandom Generators, Typically-Correct Derandomization, and Circuit Lower Bounds
- 86 Downloads
The area of derandomization attempts to provide efficient deterministic simulations of randomized algorithms in various algorithmic settings. Goldreich and Wigderson introduced a notion of “typically-correct” deterministic simulations, which are allowed to err on few inputs. In this paper, we further the study of typically-correct derandomization in two ways.
First, we develop a generic approach for constructing typically-correct derandomizations based on seed-extending pseudorandom generators, which are pseudorandom generators that reveal their seed. We use our approach to obtain both conditional and unconditional typically-correct derandomization results in various algorithmic settings. We show that our technique strictly generalizes an earlier approach by Shaltiel based on randomness extractors and simplifies the proofs of some known results. We also demonstrate that our approach is applicable in algorithmic settings where earlier work did not apply. For example, we present a typically-correct polynomial-time simulation for every language in BPP based on a hardness assumption that is (seemingly) weaker than the ones used in earlier work.
Second, we investigate whether typically-correct derandomization of BPP implies circuit lower bounds. Extending the work of Kabanets and Impagliazzo for the zero-error case, we establish a positive answer for error rates in the range considered by Goldreich and Wigderson. In doing so, we provide a simpler proof of the zero-error result. Our proof scales better than the original one and does not rely on the result by Impagliazzo, Kabanets, and Wigderson that NEXP having polynomialsize circuits implies that NEXP coincides with EXP.
KeywordsTypically-correct derandomization pseudorandom generators circuit lower bounds randomized algorithms
Subject classification68Q10 68Q15 68Q17 68Q25 03D15
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Scott Aaronson Dieter van Melkebeek (2010). A note on circuit lower bounds from derandomization. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), 17(105).Google Scholar
- László Babai, Lance Fortnow, Leonid A. Levin & Mario Szegedy (1991). Checking computations in polylogarithmic time. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 21–31.Google Scholar
- László Babai, Lance Fortnow, Noam Nisan & Avi Wigderson (1993). BPP has subexponential time simulations unless EXPTIME has publishable proofs. Computational Complexity, 3, 307–318.Google Scholar
- Aviad Cohen & Avi Wigderson (1989). Dispersers, deterministic amplification, & weak random sources (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 14–19.Google Scholar
- Oded Goldreich, Noam Nisan & Avi Wigderson (1995). On Yao’s XOR-lemma. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), 2(50).Google Scholar
- Oded Goldreich & Avi Wigderson (2000). On pseudorandomness with respect to deterministic observers. In Carleton Scientific, editor, International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pages 77–84.Google Scholar
- Oded Goldreich & Avi Wigderson (2002). Derandomization that is rarely wrong from short advice that is typically good. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Randomization and Computation (RANDOM), pages 209–223.Google Scholar
- Håstad Johan (1987) Computational limitations of small-depth circuits. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
- Russell Impagliazzo (1995). Hard-core distributions for somewhat hard problems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 538–545.Google Scholar
- Russell Impagliazzo & Avi Wigderson (1997). P = BPP if E requires exponential circuits: Derandomizing the XOR lemma. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 220–229.Google Scholar
- Russell Impagliazzo & David Zuckerman (1989). How to recycle random bits. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 248–253.Google Scholar
- Peter Bro Miltersen (2001). Derandomizing complexity classes. In Handbook of Randomized Computing, pages 843–941. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
- Omer Reingold (2008). Undirected connectivity in log-space. Journal of the ACM, 55(4).Google Scholar
- Ronen Shaltiel (2009). Weak derandomization of weak algorithms: explicit versions of Yao’s lemma. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity.Google Scholar
- Ronen Shaltiel & Christopher Umans (2007). Low-end uniform hardness vs. randomness tradeoffs for AM. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 430–439.Google Scholar
- Marius Zimand (2006). Exposure-resilient extractors. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 61–72.Google Scholar