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

Mika Göös

Mika Göös contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computational ComplexityFormal Languages and Automata Theoryquant-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
9works
0followers
3topics
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

9 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Communication Complexity of Collision

The Collision problem is to decide whether a given list of numbers $(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in[n]^n$ is $1$-to-$1$ or $2$-to-$1$ when promised one of them is the case. We show an $n^{Ω(1)}$ randomised communication lower bound for the natural two-party version of Collision where Alice holds the first half of the bits of each $x_i$ and Bob holds the second half. As an application, we also show a similar lower bound for a weak bit-pigeonhole search problem, which answers a question of Itsykson and Riazanov (CCC 2021).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Further Collapses in TFNP

We show $\textsf{EOPL}=\textsf{PLS}\cap\textsf{PPAD}$. Here the class $\textsf{EOPL}$ consists of all total search problems that reduce to the End-of-Potential-Line problem, which was introduced in the works by Hubacek and Yogev (SICOMP 2020) and Fearnley et al. (JCSS 2020). In particular, our result yields a new simpler proof of the breakthrough collapse $\textsf{CLS}=\textsf{PLS}\cap\textsf{PPAD}$ by Fearnley et al. (STOC 2021). We also prove a companion result $\textsf{SOPL}=\textsf{PLS}\cap\textsf{PPADS}$, where $\textsf{SOPL}$ is the class associated with the Sink-of-Potential-Line problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Lower Bounds for Unambiguous Automata via Communication Complexity

We use results from communication complexity, both new and old ones, to prove lower bounds for unambiguous finite automata (UFAs). We show three results. $\textit{Complement:}$ There is a language $L$ recognised by an $n$-state UFA such that the complement language $\overline{L}$ requires NFAs with $n^{\tildeΩ(\log n)}$ states. This improves on a lower bound by Raskin. $\textit{Union:}$ There are languages $L_1$, $L_2$ recognised by $n$-state UFAs such that the union $L_1\cup L_2$ requires UFAs with $n^{\tildeΩ(\log n)}$ states. $\textit{Separation:}$ There is a language $L$ such that both $L$ and $\overline{L}$ are recognised by $n$-state NFAs but such that $L$ requires UFAs with $n^{Ω(\log n)}$ states. This refutes a conjecture by Colcombet.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Randomised Composition and Small-Bias Minimax

We prove two results about randomised query complexity $\mathrm{R}(f)$. First, we introduce a "linearised" complexity measure $\mathrm{LR}$ and show that it satisfies an inner-optimal composition theorem: $\mathrm{R}(f\circ g) \geq Ω(\mathrm{R}(f) \mathrm{LR}(g))$ for all partial $f$ and $g$, and moreover, $\mathrm{LR}$ is the largest possible measure with this property. In particular, $\mathrm{LR}$ can be polynomially larger than previous measures that satisfy an inner composition theorem, such as the max-conflict complexity of Gavinsky, Lee, Santha, and Sanyal (ICALP 2019). Our second result addresses a question of Yao (FOCS 1977). He asked if $ε$-error expected query complexity $\bar{\mathrm{R}}_ε(f)$ admits a distributional characterisation relative to some hard input distribution. Vereshchagin (TCS 1998) answered this question affirmatively in the bounded-error case. We show that an analogous theorem fails in the small-bias case $ε=1/2-o(1)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Automating Cutting Planes is NP-Hard}

We show that Cutting Planes (CP) proofs are hard to find: Given an unsatisfiable formula $F$, 1) It is NP-hard to find a CP refutation of $F$ in time polynomial in the length of the shortest such refutation; and 2)unless Gap-Hitting-Set admits a nontrivial algorithm, one cannot find a tree-like CP refutation of $F$ in time polynomial in the length of the shortest such refutation. The first result extends the recent breakthrough of Atserias and Müller (FOCS 2019) that established an analogous result for Resolution. Our proofs rely on two new lifting theorems: (1) Dag-like lifting for gadgets with many output bits. (2) Tree-like lifting that simulates an $r$-round protocol with gadgets of query complexity $O(\log r)$ independent of input length.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the Complexity of Modulo-q Arguments and the Chevalley-Warning Theorem

We study the search problem class $\mathrm{PPA}_q$ defined as a modulo-$q$ analog of the well-known $\textit{polynomial parity argument}$ class $\mathrm{PPA}$ introduced by Papadimitriou '94. Our first result shows that this class can be characterized in terms of $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ for prime $p$. Our main result is to establish that an $\textit{explicit}$ version of a search problem associated to the Chevalley--Warning theorem is complete for $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ for prime $p$. This problem is $\textit{natural}$ in that it does not explicitly involve circuits as part of the input. It is the first such complete problem for $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ when $p \ge 3$. Finally we discuss connections between Chevalley-Warning theorem and the well-studied $\textit{short integer solution}$ problem and survey the structural properties of $\mathrm{PPA}_q$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The Power of Many Samples in Query Complexity

The randomized query complexity $R(f)$ of a boolean function $f\colon\{0,1\}^n\to\{0,1\}$ is famously characterized (via Yao's minimax) by the least number of queries needed to distinguish a distribution $D_0$ over $0$-inputs from a distribution $D_1$ over $1$-inputs, maximized over all pairs $(D_0,D_1)$. We ask: Does this task become easier if we allow query access to infinitely many samples from either $D_0$ or $D_1$? We show the answer is no: There exists a hard pair $(D_0,D_1)$ such that distinguishing $D_0^\infty$ from $D_1^\infty$ requires $Θ(R(f))$ many queries. As an application, we show that for any composed function $f\circ g$ we have $R(f\circ g) \geq Ω(\mathrm{fbs}(f)R(g))$ where $\mathrm{fbs}$ denotes fractional block sensitivity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

When Is Amplification Necessary for Composition in Randomized Query Complexity?

Suppose we have randomized decision trees for an outer function $f$ and an inner function $g$. The natural approach for obtaining a randomized decision tree for the composed function $(f\circ g^n)(x^1,\ldots,x^n)=f(g(x^1),\ldots,g(x^n))$ involves amplifying the success probability of the decision tree for $g$, so that a union bound can be used to bound the error probability over all the coordinates. The amplification introduces a logarithmic factor cost overhead. We study the question: When is this log factor necessary? We show that when the outer function is parity or majority, the log factor can be necessary, even for models that are more powerful than plain randomized decision trees. Our results are related to, but qualitatively strengthen in various ways, known results about decision trees with noisy inputs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access