Advertisement

On probabilistic ACC circuits with an exact-threshold output gate

  • Richard Beigel
  • Jun Tarui
  • Seinosuke Toda
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 650)

Abstract

Let SYM+ denote the class of Boolean functions computable by depth-two size-\(n^{log^{O(1)} n}\) circuits with a symmetric-function gate at the root and AND gates of fan-in logO(1)n at the next level, or equivalently, the class of Boolean functions h such that h(x1,⋯ ,x n ) can be expressed as h(x1,⋯, xn) =h n(pn(x1,⋯, x n )) for some polynomial p n over Z of degree logO(1)n and norm (the sum of the absolute values of its coefficients) \(n^{log^{O(1)} n}\) and some function h n : Z → {0,1}. Building on work of Yao [Yao90], Beigel and Tarui [BT91] showed that ACC \(\subseteq\) SYM+, where ACC is the class of Boolean functions computable by constant-depth polynomial-size circuits with NOT, AND, OR, and MODm gates for some fixed m.

In this paper, we consider augmenting the power of ACC circuits by allowing randomness and allowing an exact-threshold gate as the output gate (an exact-threshold gate outputs 1 if exactly k of its inputs are 1, where k is a parameter; it outputs 0 otherwise), and show that every Boolean function computed by this kind of augmented ACC circuits is still in SYM+.

Showing that some “natural” function h does not belong to the class ACC remains an open problem in circuit complexity, and the result that ACC \(\subseteq\) SYM+ has raised the hope that we may be able to solve this problem by exploiting the characterization of SYM+ in terms of polynomials, which are perhaps easier to analyze than circuits, and showing that h ∋ SYM+. Our new result and proof techniques suggest that the possibility that SYM+ contains even more Boolean functions than we currently know should also be kept in mind and explored.

By a well-known connection [FSS84], we also obtain new results about some classes related to the polynomial-time hierarchy.

Keywords

Boolean Function IEEE Computer Society Chinese Remainder Theorem Count Gate Output Gate 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [ABO84]
    M. Ajtai and M. Ben-Or. A theorem on probabilistic constant depth circuits. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 471–474. ACM Press, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. [AH90]
    E. Allender and U. Hertrampf. On the power of uniform families of constant depth threshold circuits. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, pages 158–164. Springer-Verlag, 1990. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 452.Google Scholar
  3. [Ajt83]
    M. Ajtai. σ11 formulae on finite structures. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic, 24:1–48, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Bar89]
    D. Barrington. Bounded-width polynomial-size branching programs recognize exactly those languages in NC1. J. Comput. System Sci., 38(1):150–164, February 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Bar92]
    D. Barrington. Quasipolynomial size circuit classes. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 86–93. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. [BS90]
    R. Boppana and M. Sipser. The complexity of finite functions. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science: Vol. A, pages 757–804. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
  7. [BT91]
    R. Beigel and J. Tarui. On ACC. In Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 783–792. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [Che52]
    H. Chernoff. A measure of asymptotic efficiency for tests of a hypothesis based on the sum of observations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 23:493–507, 1952.Google Scholar
  9. [FSS84]
    M. Furst, J. Saxe, and M. Sipser. Parity, circuits and the polynomial-time hierarchy. Math. Systems Theory, 17:13–27, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [Has87]
    J. Hastad. Computational Limitations of Small-Depth Circuits. MIT Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. [Joh90]
    D. Johnson. A catalog of complexity classes. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science: Vol. A, pages 67–161. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. [Raz87]
    A. Razborov. Lower bounds for the size of circuits of bounded depth with basis {∧,⊕}. Mathematical Notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 41(4):333–338, September 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [Sip92]
    M. Sipser. The history and status of the P versus NP question. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 603–618. ACM Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. [Smo87]
    R. Smolensky. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for Boolean circuit complexity. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 77–82. ACM Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. [Tod89]
    S. Toda. On the computational power of PP and ⊕P. In Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 514–519. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  16. [Tod91]
    S. Toda. PP is as hard as the polynomial-time hierarchy. SIAM J. Comput., 20(5):865–877, 1991. Earlier version appeared as [Tod89].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Val79]
    L. Valiant. The complexity of computing the permanent. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 7:189–201, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [VV86]
    L. Valiant and V. Vazirani. NP is as easy as detecting unique solutions. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 47:85–93, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [Yao85]
    A. Yao. Separating the polynomial-time hierarchy by oracles. In Proceedings of the 26th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 1–10. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. [Yao90]
    A. Yao. On ACC and threshold circuits. In Proceedings of the 31st IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 619–627. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Beigel
    • 1
  • Jun Tarui
    • 2
  • Seinosuke Toda
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and Information MathematicsUniversity of Electro-CommunicationsTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations