Pseudorandomness from Shrinkage

One powerful theme in complexity theory and pseudorandomness in the past few decades has been the use lower bounds to give pseudorandom generators (PRGs). However, the general results using this hardness vs. randomness paradigm suffer a quantitative loss in parameters, and hence do not give nontrivial implications for models where we don't know superpolynomial lower bounds but do know lower bounds of a fixed polynomial. We show that when such lower bounds are proved using random restrictions, we can construct PRGs which are essentially best possible without in turn improving the lower bounds. More specifically, say that a circuit family has shrinkage exponent Γ if a random restriction leaving a p fraction of variables unset shrinks the size of any circuit in the family by a factor of pΓ+o(1). Our PRG uses a seed of length s1/(Γ+1)+o(1) to fool circuits in the family of size s. By using this generic construction, we get PRGs with polynomially small error for the following classes of circuits of size s and with the following seed lengths: 1) For de Morgan formulas, seed length s1/3+o(1); 2) For formulas over an arbitrary basis, seed length s1/2+o(1); 3) For read-once de Morgan formulas, seed length s.234...; 4) For branching programs of size s, seed length s1/2+o(1). The previous best PRGs known for these classes used seeds of length bigger than n/2 to output n bits, and worked only when the size s = O(n) [1].

[1]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Pseudorandom generators for space-bounded computations , 1990, STOC '90.

[2]  Salil P. Vadhan,et al.  Limitations of Hardness vs. Randomness under Uniform Reductions , 2008, APPROX-RANDOM.

[3]  Manuel Blum,et al.  How to generate cryptographically strong sequences of pseudo random bits , 1982, 23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1982).

[4]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  In search of an easy witness: exponential time vs. probabilistic polynomial time , 2001, Proceedings 16th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity.

[5]  Ryan Williams Improving Exhaustive Search Implies Superpolynomial Lower Bounds , 2013, SIAM J. Comput..

[6]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Derandomizing Polynomial Identity Tests Means Proving Circuit Lower Bounds , 2003, STOC '03.

[7]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Randomness is Linear in Space , 1996, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[8]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Hardness vs. randomness , 1988, [Proceedings 1988] 29th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[9]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Pseudorandomness for network algorithms , 1994, STOC '94.

[10]  Noga Alon,et al.  The Probabilistic Method , 2015, Fundamentals of Ramsey Theory.

[11]  V. M. Khrapchenko Complexity of the realization of a linear function in the class of II-circuits , 1971 .

[12]  Noam Nisan,et al.  The Effect of Random Restrictions on Formula Size , 1993, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[13]  Periklis A. Papakonstantinou,et al.  Pseudorandomness for Read-Once Formulas , 2011, 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[14]  Emanuele Viola,et al.  Hardness amplification proofs require majority , 2008, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Ding‐Zhu Du,et al.  Wiley Series in Discrete Mathematics and Optimization , 2014 .

[16]  Alexander A. Razborov,et al.  On the Shrinkage Exponent for Read-Once Formulae , 1995, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Ran Raz,et al.  Average-case lower bounds for formula size , 2013, STOC '13.

[18]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Pseudorandom generators for space-bounded computation , 1992, Comb..

[19]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Pseudorandom bits for constant depth circuits , 1991, Comb..

[20]  Ronen Shaltiel,et al.  Lower Bounds on the Query Complexity of Non-uniform and Adaptive Reductions Showing Hardness Amplification , 2012, computational complexity.

[21]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Deterministic Simulation of Probabilistic Constant Depth Circuits (Preliminary Version) , 1985, FOCS 1985.

[22]  Noam Nisan,et al.  BPP has subexponential time simulations unless EXPTIME has publishable proofs , 1991, [1991] Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference.

[23]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  Short Monotone Formulae for the Majority Function , 1984, J. Algorithms.

[24]  Johan Hå stad The Shrinkage Exponent of de Morgan Formulas is 2 , 1998 .

[25]  Andrew Chi-Chih Yao,et al.  Theory and Applications of Trapdoor Functions (Extended Abstract) , 1982, FOCS.

[26]  David Zuckerman Randomness-optimal oblivious sampling , 1997, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[27]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Chernoff-Hoeffding bounds for applications with limited independence , 1995, SODA '93.

[28]  Uri Zwick,et al.  Shrinkage of de Morgan formulae under restriction , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[29]  Thomas Watson Query Complexity in Errorless Hardness Amplification , 2011, APPROX-RANDOM.