A central problem in the algorithmic study of lattices is the closest vector problem: given a lattice \(\mathcal{L}\) represented by some basis, and a target point \(\vec{y}\), find the lattice point closest to \(\vec{y}\). Bounded Distance Decoding is a variant of this problem in which the target is guaranteed to be close to the lattice, relative to the minimum distance \(\lambda_1(\mathcal{L})\) of the lattice. Specifically, in the α-Bounded Distance Decoding problem (α-BDD), we are given a lattice \(\mathcal{L}\) and a vector \(\vec{y}\) (within distance \(\alpha\cdot\lambda_1(\mathcal{L})\) from the lattice), and we are asked to find a lattice point \(\vec{x}\in \mathcal{L}\) within distance \(\alpha\cdot\lambda_1(\mathcal{L})\) from the target. In coding theory, the lattice points correspond to codewords, and the target points correspond to lattice points being perturbed by noise vectors. Since in coding theory the lattice is usually fixed, we may “pre-process” it before receiving any targets, to make the subsequent decoding faster. This leads us to consider α-BDD with pre-processing. We show how a recent technique of Aharonov and Regev [2] can be used to solve α-BDD with pre-processing in polynomial time for \(\alpha=O\left(\sqrt{(\log{n})/n}\right)\). This improves upon the previously best known algorithm due to Klein [13] which solved the problem for \(\alpha=O\left(1/n\right)\). We also establish hardness results for α-BDD and α-BDD with pre-processing, as well as generalize our results to other ℓ p norms.


Polynomial Time Lattice Point Lattice Vector Target Point Hardness Result 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agrell, E., Eriksson, T., Vardy, A., Zeger, K.: Closest point search in lattices. IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 48(8), 2201–2214 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aharonov, D., Regev, O.: Lattice problems in NP ∩ coNP. Journal of the ACM 52(5), 749–765 (2005)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ajtai, M., Kumar, R., Sivakumar, D.: Sampling short lattice vectors and the closest lattice vector problem. In: CCC, pp. 53–57 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alekhnovich, M., Khot, S., Kindler, G., Vishnoi, N.: Hardness of approximating the closest vector problem with pre-processing. In: FOCS (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arora, S., Babai, L., Stern, J., Sweedyk, Z.: The hardness of approximate optima in lattices, codes, and systems of linear equations. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 54(2), 317–331 (1997)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Babai, L.: On Lovász’ lattice reduction and the nearest lattice point problem. Combinatorica 6(1), 1–13 (1986)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Banaszczyk, W.: New bounds in some transference theorems in the geometry of numbers. Mathematische Annalen 296(4), 625–635 (1993)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Banihashemi, A.H., Khandani, A.K.: On the complexity of decoding lattices using the Korkin-Zolotarev reduced basis. IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 44(1), 162–171 (1998)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dinur, I., Kindler, G., Raz, R., Safra, S.: Approximating CVP to within almost-polynomial factors is NP-hard. Combinatorica 23(2), 205–243 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dumer, I., Micciancio, D., Sudan, M.: Hardness of approximating the minimum distance of a linear code. IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 49(1), 22–37 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feige, U., Micciancio, D.: The inapproximability of lattice and coding problems with preprocessing. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 69(1), 45–67Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khot, S.: Hardness of approximating the shortest vector problem in lattices. In: FOCS, pp. 126–135 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klein, P.: Finding the closest lattice vector when it’s unusually close. In: SODA, pp. 937–941 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lagarias, J.C., Lenstra Jr., H.W., Schnorr, C.P.: Korkin-zolotarev bases and successive minima of a lattice and its reciprocal lattice. Combinatorica 10(4), 333–348 (1990)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Micciancio, D.: The hardness of the closest vector problem with preprocessing. IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 47(3), 1212–1215 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Micciancio, D.: The shortest vector problem is NP-hard to approximate to within some constant. SIAM J. on Computing 30(6), 2008–2035 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Micciancio, D., Goldwasser, S.: Complexity of Lattice Problems: A Cryptographic Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Regev, O.: Improved inapproximability of lattice and coding problems with preprocessing. IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory 50(9), 2031–2037 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Regev, O., Rosen, R.: Lattice problems and norm embeddings. In: STOC (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schoenberg, I.J.: Metric spaces and positive definite functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 44(3), 522–536 (1938)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stefankovic, D.: Fourier transforms in computer science. Master’s thesis, University of Chicago (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stewart, J.: Positive definite functions and generalizations, an historical survey. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 6(3) (1976)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vardy, A.: Algorithmic complexity in coding theory and the minimum distance problem. In: STOC, pp. 92–109 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yi-Kai Liu
    • 1
  • Vadim Lyubashevsky
    • 1
  • Daniele Micciancio
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaSan Diego, La JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations