skip to main content
10.1145/2213977.2213998acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Short proofs for the determinant identities

Published:19 May 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

We study arithmetic proof systems Pc(F) and Pf(F) operating with arithmetic circuits and arithmetic formulas, respectively, that prove polynomial identities over a field F. We establish a series of structural theorems about these proof systems, the main one stating that Pc(F) proofs can be balanced: if a polynomial identity of syntactic degree d and depth k has a Pc(F) proof of size s, then it also has a Pc(F) proof of size poly(s,d) and depth O(k+log2 d + log d• log s). As a corollary, we obtain a quasipolynomial simulation of Pc(F) by Pf(F), for identities of a polynomial syntactic degree. Using these results we obtain the following: consider the identities: det(XY) = det(X)•det(Y) and det(Z)= z11 ••• znn, where X,Y and Z are n x n square matrices and Z is a triangular matrix with z11,..., znn on the diagonal (and det is the determinant polynomial). Then we can construct a polynomial-size arithmetic circuit det such that the above identities have Pc(F) proofs of polynomial-size and O(log2n) depth. Moreover, there exists an arithmetic formula det of size nO(log n) such that the above identities have Pf(F) proofs of size nO(log n).

This yields a solution to a basic open problem in propositional proof complexity, namely, whether there are polynomial-size NC2-Frege proofs for the determinant identities and the hard matrix identities, as considered, e.g. in Soltys and Cook (2004) (cf., Beame and Pitassi (1998). We show that matrix identities like AB=I -> BA=I (for matrices over the two element field) as well as basic properties of the determinant have polynomial-size NC2-Frege proofs, and quasipolynomial-size Frege proofs.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

stoc_4a_1.mp4

mp4

134.5 MB

References

  1. Paul Beame and Toniann Pitassi. Propositional proof complexity: past, present, and future. Bull. Eur. Assoc. Theor. Comput. Sci. EATCS, (65):66--89, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Stuart J. Berkowitz. On computing the determinant in small parallel time using a small number of processors. Inf. Process. Lett., 18:147--150, 1984. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Maria Luisa Bonet, Samuel R. Buss, and Toniann Pitassi. Are there hard examples for Frege systems? In Feasible mathematics, II, volume 13 of Progr. Comput. Sci. Appl. Logic, pages 30--56. Birkhauser, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Pavel Hrubes and Iddo Tzameret. The proof complexity of polynomial identities. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 41--51, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Laurent Hyafil. On the parallel evaluation of multivariate polynomials. SIAM J. Comput., 8(2):120--123, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Emil Jerábek. Dual weak pigeonhole principle, Boolean complexity, and derandomization. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic, 129(1--3):1--37, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Jan Krajícek. Bounded arithmetic, propositional logic, and complexity theory, volume 60 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ran Raz and Amir Yehudayoff. Balancing syntactically multilinear arithmetic circuits. Comput. Complexity, 17:515--535, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jacob T. Schwartz. Fast probabilistic algorithms for verification of polynomial identities. Journal of the ACM, 27(4):701--717, 1980. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Nathan Segerlind. The complexity of propositional proofs. Bull. Symbolic Logic, 13(4):417--481, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Amir Shpilka and Amir Yehudayoff. Arithmetic circuits: A survey of recent results and open questions. Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, 5(3--4):207--388, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Michael Soltys. The complexity of derivations of matrix identities. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Michael Soltys. Feasible proofs of matrix properties with csanky's algorithm. In 19th International Workshop on Comp. Sci. Log., pages 493--508, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Michael Soltys and Stephen Cook. The proof complexity of linear algebra. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic, 130(1--3):277--323, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Michael Soltys and Alasdair Urquhart. Matrix identities and the pigeonhole principle. Arch. Math. Logic, 43(3):351--357, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Volker Strassen. Vermeidung von divisionen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 264:182--202, 1973. (in German).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Leslie G. Valiant. Completeness classes in algebra. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 249--261. ACM, 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Leslie G. Valiant, Sven Skyum, S. Berkowitz, and Charles Rackoff. Fast parallel computation of polynomials using few processors. SIAM J. Comput., 12(4):641--644, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Richard Zippel. Probabilistic algorithms for sparse polynomials. In Proceedings of the International Symposiumon on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, pages 216--226. Springer-Verlag, 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Short proofs for the determinant identities

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          STOC '12: Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
          May 2012
          1310 pages
          ISBN:9781450312455
          DOI:10.1145/2213977

          Copyright © 2012 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 May 2012

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,469of4,586submissions,32%

          Upcoming Conference

          STOC '24
          56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2024)
          June 24 - 28, 2024
          Vancouver , BC , Canada

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader