BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Shalev Ben-David

Shalev Ben-David appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computational Complexityquant-phData Structures and AlgorithmsMachine Learningmath.CO

Catalog footprint

What is connected

13works
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

13 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Monte Carlo to Las Vegas for Recursively Composed Functions

For a (possibly partial) Boolean function $f\colon\{0,1\}^n\to\{0,1\}$ as well as a query complexity measure $M$ which maps Boolean functions to real numbers, define the composition limit of $M$ on $f$ by $M^*(f)=\lim_{k\to\infty} M(f^k)^{1/k}$. We study the composition limits of general measures in query complexity. We show this limit converges under reasonable assumptions about the measure. We then give a surprising result regarding the composition limit of randomized query complexity: we show $R_0^*(f)=\max\{R^*(f),C^*(f)\}$. Among other things, this implies that any bounded-error randomized algorithm for recursive 3-majority can be turned into a zero-error randomized algorithm for the same task. Our result extends also to quantum algorithms: on recursively composed functions, a bounded-error quantum algorithm can be converted into a quantum algorithm that finds a certificate with high probability. Along the way, we prove various combinatorial properties of measures and composition limits.

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

A New Minimax Theorem for Randomized Algorithms

The celebrated minimax principle of Yao (1977) says that for any Boolean-valued function $f$ with finite domain, there is a distribution $μ$ over the domain of $f$ such that computing $f$ to error $ε$ against inputs from $μ$ is just as hard as computing $f$ to error $ε$ on worst-case inputs. Notably, however, the distribution $μ$ depends on the target error level $ε$: the hard distribution which is tight for bounded error might be trivial to solve to small bias, and the hard distribution which is tight for a small bias level might be far from tight for bounded error levels. In this work, we introduce a new type of minimax theorem which can provide a hard distribution $μ$ that works for all bias levels at once. We show that this works for randomized query complexity, randomized communication complexity, some randomized circuit models, quantum query and communication complexities, approximate polynomial degree, and approximate logrank. We also prove an improved version of Impagliazzo's hardcore lemma. Our proofs rely on two innovations over the classical approach of using Von Neumann's minimax theorem or linear programming duality. First, we use Sion's minimax theorem to prove a minimax theorem for ratios of bilinear functions representing the cost and score of algorithms. Second, we introduce a new way to analyze low-bias randomized algorithms by viewing them as "forecasting algorithms" evaluated by a proper scoring rule. The expected score of the forecasting version of a randomized algorithm appears to be a more fine-grained way of analyzing the bias of the algorithm. We show that such expected scores have many elegant mathematical properties: for example, they can be amplified linearly instead of quadratically. We anticipate forecasting algorithms will find use in future work in which a fine-grained analysis of small-bias algorithms is required.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

How symmetric is too symmetric for large quantum speedups?

Suppose a Boolean function $f$ is symmetric under a group action $G$ acting on the $n$ bits of the input. For which $G$ does this mean $f$ does not have an exponential quantum speedup? Is there a characterization of how rich $G$ must be before the function $f$ cannot have enough structure for quantum algorithms to exploit? In this work, we make several steps towards understanding the group actions $G$ which are "quantum intolerant" in this way. We show that sufficiently transitive group actions do not allow a quantum speedup, and that a "well-shuffling" property of group actions -- which happens to be preserved by several natural transformations -- implies a lack of super-polynomial speedups for functions symmetric under the group action. Our techniques are motivated by a recent paper by Chailloux (2018), which deals with the case where $G=S_n$. Our main application is for graph symmetries: we show that any Boolean function $f$ defined on the adjacency matrix of a graph (and symmetric under relabeling the vertices of the graph) has a power $6$ relationship between its randomized and quantum query complexities, even if $f$ is a partial function. In particular, this means no graph property testing problems can have super-polynomial quantum speedups, settling an open problem of Ambainis, Childs, and Liu (2011).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Quantum Implications of Huang's Sensitivity Theorem

Based on the recent breakthrough of Huang (2019), we show that for any total Boolean function $f$, the deterministic query complexity, $D(f)$, is at most quartic in the quantum query complexity, $Q(f)$: $D(f) = O(Q(f)^4)$. This matches the known separation (up to log factors) due to Ambainis, Balodis, Belovs, Lee, Santha, and Smotrovs (2017). We also use the result to resolve the quantum analogue of the Aanderaa-Karp-Rosenberg conjecture. We show that if $f$ is a nontrivial monotone graph property of an $n$-vertex graph specified by its adjacency matrix, then $Q(f) = Ω(n)$, which is also optimal.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Symmetries, graph properties, and quantum speedups

Aaronson and Ambainis (2009) and Chailloux (2018) showed that fully symmetric (partial) functions do not admit exponential quantum query speedups. This raises a natural question: how symmetric must a function be before it cannot exhibit a large quantum speedup? In this work, we prove that hypergraph symmetries in the adjacency matrix model allow at most a polynomial separation between randomized and quantum query complexities. We also show that, remarkably, permutation groups constructed out of these symmetries are essentially the only permutation groups that prevent super-polynomial quantum speedups. We prove this by fully characterizing the primitive permutation groups that allow super-polynomial quantum speedups. In contrast, in the adjacency list model for bounded-degree graphs (where graph symmetry is manifested differently), we exhibit a property testing problem that shows an exponential quantum speedup. These results resolve open questions posed by Ambainis, Childs, and Liu (2010) and Montanaro and de Wolf (2013).

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
preprint2016arXiv

Randomized query complexity of sabotaged and composed functions

We study the composition question for bounded-error randomized query complexity: Is R(f o g) = Omega(R(f) R(g)) for all Boolean functions f and g? We show that inserting a simple Boolean function h, whose query complexity is only Theta(log R(g)), in between f and g allows us to prove R(f o h o g) = Omega(R(f) R(h) R(g)). We prove this using a new lower bound measure for randomized query complexity we call randomized sabotage complexity, RS(f). Randomized sabotage complexity has several desirable properties, such as a perfect composition theorem, RS(f o g) >= RS(f) RS(g), and a composition theorem with randomized query complexity, R(f o g) = Omega(R(f) RS(g)). It is also a quadratically tight lower bound for total functions and can be quadratically superior to the partition bound, the best known general lower bound for randomized query complexity. Using this technique we also show implications for lifting theorems in communication complexity. We show that a general lifting theorem for zero-error randomized protocols implies a general lifting theorem for bounded-error protocols.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

A Super-Grover Separation Between Randomized and Quantum Query Complexities

We construct a total Boolean function $f$ satisfying $R(f)=\tildeΩ(Q(f)^{5/2})$, refuting the long-standing conjecture that $R(f)=O(Q(f)^2)$ for all total Boolean functions. Assuming a conjecture of Aaronson and Ambainis about optimal quantum speedups for partial functions, we improve this to $R(f)=\tildeΩ(Q(f)^3)$. Our construction is motivated by the Göös-Pitassi-Watson function but does not use it.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Sculpting Quantum Speedups

Given a problem which is intractable for both quantum and classical algorithms, can we find a sub-problem for which quantum algorithms provide an exponential advantage? We refer to this problem as the "sculpting problem." In this work, we give a full characterization of sculptable functions in the query complexity setting. We show that a total function f can be restricted to a promise P such that Q(f|_P)=O(polylog(N)) and R(f|_P)=N^{Omega(1)}, if and only if f has a large number of inputs with large certificate complexity. The proof uses some interesting techniques: for one direction, we introduce new relationships between randomized and quantum query complexity in various settings, and for the other direction, we use a recent result from communication complexity due to Klartag and Regev. We also characterize sculpting for other query complexity measures, such as R(f) vs. R_0(f) and R_0(f) vs. D(f). Along the way, we prove some new relationships for quantum query complexity: for example, a nearly quadratic relationship between Q(f) and D(f) whenever the promise of f is small. This contrasts with the recent super-quadratic query complexity separations, showing that the maximum gap between classical and quantum query complexities is indeed quadratic in various settings - just not for total functions! Lastly, we investigate sculpting in the Turing machine model. We show that if there is any BPP-bi-immune language in BQP, then every language outside BPP can be restricted to a promise which places it in PromiseBQP but not in PromiseBPP. Under a weaker assumption, that some problem in BQP is hard on average for P/poly, we show that every paddable language outside BPP is sculptable in this way.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Data Stability in Clustering: A Closer Look

We consider the model introduced by Bilu and Linial (2010), who study problems for which the optimal clustering does not change when distances are perturbed. They show that even when a problem is NP-hard, it is sometimes possible to obtain efficient algorithms for instances resilient to certain multiplicative perturbations, e.g. on the order of $O(\sqrt{n})$ for max-cut clustering. Awasthi et al. (2010) consider center-based objectives, and Balcan and Liang (2011) analyze the $k$-median and min-sum objectives, giving efficient algorithms for instances resilient to certain constant multiplicative perturbations. Here, we are motivated by the question of to what extent these assumptions can be relaxed while allowing for efficient algorithms. We show there is little room to improve these results by giving NP-hardness lower bounds for both the $k$-median and min-sum objectives. On the other hand, we show that constant multiplicative resilience parameters can be so strong as to make the clustering problem trivial, leaving only a narrow range of resilience parameters for which clustering is interesting. We also consider a model of additive perturbations and give a correspondence between additive and multiplicative notions of stability. Our results provide a close examination of the consequences of assuming stability in data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

The Structure of Promises in Quantum Speedups

It has long been known that in the usual black-box model, one cannot get super-polynomial quantum speedups without some promise on the inputs. In this paper, we examine certain types of symmetric promises, and show that they also cannot give rise to super-polynomial quantum speedups. We conclude that exponential quantum speedups only occur given "structured" promises on the input. Specifically, we show that there is a polynomial relationship of degree $12$ between $D(f)$ and $Q(f)$ for any function $f$ defined on permutations (elements of $\{0,1,\dots, M-1\}^n$ in which each alphabet element occurs exactly once). We generalize this result to all functions $f$ defined on orbits of the symmetric group action $S_n$ (which acts on an element of $\{0,1,\dots, M-1\}^n$ by permuting its entries). We also show that when $M$ is constant, any function $f$ defined on a "symmetric set" - one invariant under $S_n$ - satisfies $R(f)=O(Q(f)^{12(M-1)})$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access