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

Shalev Ben-David

Shalev Ben-David contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computational Complexityquant-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
2topics
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

7 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