The expressive power of voting polynomials

We consider the problem of approximating a Boolean functionf∶{0,1} n →{0,1} by the sign of an integer polynomialp of degreek. For us, a polynomialp(x) predicts the value off(x) if, wheneverp(x)≥0,f(x)=1, and wheneverp(x)<0,f(x)=0. A low-degree polynomialp is a good approximator forf if it predictsf at almost all points. Given a positive integerk, and a Boolean functionf, we ask, “how good is the best degreek approximation tof?” We introduce a new lower bound technique which applies to any Boolean function. We show that the lower bound technique yields tight bounds in the casef is parity. Minsky and Papert [10] proved that a perceptron cannot compute parity; our bounds indicate exactly how well a perceptron canapproximate it. As a consequence, we are able to give the first correct proof that, for a random oracleA, PP A is properly contained in PSPACE A . We are also able to prove the old AC0 exponential-size lower bounds in a new way. This allows us to prove the new result that an AC0 circuit with one majority gate cannot approximate parity. Our proof depends only on basic properties of integer polynomials.

[1]  Erich Stiemke Über positive Lösungen homogener linearer Gleichungen , 1915 .

[2]  Richard Beigel,et al.  Relativized Counting Classes: Relations among Thresholds, Parity, and Mods , 1991, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[3]  Jehoshua Bruck,et al.  Harmonic Analysis of Polynomial Threshold Functions , 1990, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

[4]  Roman Smolensky,et al.  Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for Boolean circuit complexity , 1987, STOC.

[5]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  NP is as easy as detecting unique solutions , 1985, STOC '85.

[6]  John Gill,et al.  Relative to a Random Oracle A, PA != NPA != co-NPA with Probability 1 , 1981, SIAM J. Comput..

[7]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  Perceptrons: expanded edition , 1988 .

[8]  Jehoshua Bruck,et al.  Polynomial threshold functions, AC functions and spectrum norms , 1990, Proceedings [1990] 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[9]  Andrew Chi-Chih Yao,et al.  Separating the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy by Oracles (Preliminary Version) , 1985, FOCS.

[10]  A. Razborov Lower bounds on the size of bounded depth circuits over a complete basis with logical addition , 1987 .

[11]  Jun Tarui Randomized Polynomials, Threshold Circuits, and the Polynomial Hierarchy , 1991, STACS.

[12]  Jean-Pierre Bourguignon,et al.  Mathematische Annalen , 1893 .

[13]  M. A. Epstein Lower Bounds for the Size of Circuits of Bounded Depth in Basis F^; G , 1986 .

[14]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Constant depth circuits, Fourier transform, and learnability , 1989, 30th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[15]  Daniel A. Spielman,et al.  The perceptron strikes back , 1991, [1991] Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference.

[16]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  On threshold circuits for parity , 1990, Proceedings [1990] 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.