BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Joshua A. Grochow

Joshua A. Grochow contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computational Complexitycs.CYData Structures and Algorithmsmath.COmath.GRmath.LO

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Polynomial-Time Axioms of Choice and Polynomial-Time Cardinality

There is no single canonical polynomial-time version of the Axiom of Choice (AC); several statements of AC that are equivalent in Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) set theory are already inequivalent from a constructive point of view, and are similarly inequivalent from a complexity-theoretic point of view. In this paper we show that many classical formulations of AC, when restricted to polynomial time in natural ways, are equivalent to standard complexity-theoretic hypotheses, including several that were of interest to Selman. This provides a unified view of these hypotheses, and we hope provides additional motivation for studying some of the lesser-known hypotheses that appear here. Additionally, because several classical forms of AC are formulated in terms of cardinals, we develop a theory of polynomial-time cardinality. Nerode & Remmel (Contemp. Math. 106, 1990 and Springer Lec. Notes Math. 1432, 1990) developed a related theory, but restricted to unary sets. Downey (Math. Reviews MR1071525) suggested that such a theory over larger alphabets could have interesting connections to more standard complexity questions, and we illustrate some of those connections here. The connections between AC, cardinality, and complexity questions also allow us to highlight some of Selman's work. We hope this paper is more of a beginning than an end, introducing new concepts and raising many new questions, ripe for further research.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Experience Report: Standards-Based Grading at Scale in Algorithms

We report our experiences implementing standards-based grading at scale in an Algorithms course, which serves as the terminal required CS Theory course in our department's undergraduate curriculum. The course had 200-400 students, taught by two instructors, eight graduate teaching assistants, and supported by two additional graders and several undergraduate course assistants. We highlight the role of standards-based grading in supporting our students during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conclude by detailing the successes and adjustments we would make to the course structure.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Matrix multiplication via matrix groups

In 2003, Cohn and Umans proposed a group-theoretic approach to bounding the exponent of matrix multiplication. Previous work within this approach ruled out certain families of groups as a route to obtaining $ω= 2$, while other families of groups remain potentially viable. In this paper we turn our attention to matrix groups, whose usefulness within this framework was relatively unexplored. We first show that groups of Lie type cannot prove $ω=2$ within the group-theoretic approach. This is based on a representation-theoretic argument that identifies the second-smallest dimension of an irreducible representation of a group as a key parameter that determines its viability in this framework. Our proof builds on Gowers' result concerning product-free sets in quasirandom groups. We then give another barrier that rules out certain natural matrix group constructions that make use of subgroups that are far from being self-normalizing. Our barrier results leave open several natural paths to obtain $ω= 2$ via matrix groups. To explore these routes we propose working in the continuous setting of Lie groups, in which we develop an analogous theory. Obtaining the analogue of $ω=2$ in this potentially easier setting is a key challenge that represents an intermediate goal short of actually proving $ω= 2$. We give two constructions in the continuous setting, each of which evades one of our two barriers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access