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

Supartha Podder

Supartha Podder appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computational Complexityquant-phDiscrete Mathematicsmath.CO

Catalog footprint

What is connected

7works
4topics
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

7 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Communication memento: Memoryless communication complexity

We study the communication complexity of computing functions $F:\{0,1\}^n\times \{0,1\}^n \rightarrow \{0,1\}$ in the memoryless communication model. Here, Alice is given $x\in \{0,1\}^n$, Bob is given $y\in \{0,1\}^n$ and their goal is to compute F(x,y) subject to the following constraint: at every round, Alice receives a message from Bob and her reply to Bob solely depends on the message received and her input x; the same applies to Bob. The cost of computing F in this model is the maximum number of bits exchanged in any round between Alice and Bob (on the worst case input x,y). In this paper, we also consider variants of our memoryless model wherein one party is allowed to have memory, the parties are allowed to communicate quantum bits, only one player is allowed to send messages. We show that our memoryless communication model capture the garden-hose model of computation by Buhrman et al. (ITCS'13), space bounded communication complexity by Brody et al. (ITCS'13) and the overlay communication complexity by Papakonstantinou et al. (CCC'14). Thus the memoryless communication complexity model provides a unified framework to study space-bounded communication models. We establish the following: (1) We show that the memoryless communication complexity of F equals the logarithm of the size of the smallest bipartite branching program computing F (up to a factor 2); (2) We show that memoryless communication complexity equals garden-hose complexity; (3) We exhibit various exponential separations between these memoryless communication models. We end with an intriguing open question: can we find an explicit function F and universal constant c>1 for which the memoryless communication complexity is at least $c \log n$? Note that $c\geq 2+\varepsilon$ would imply a $Ω(n^{2+\varepsilon})$ lower bound for general formula size, improving upon the best lower bound by Nečiporuk in 1966.

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

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
preprint2015arXiv

Graph properties in node-query setting: effect of breaking symmetry

The query complexity of graph properties is well-studied when queries are on edges. We investigate the same when queries are on nodes. In this setting a graph $G = (V, E)$ on $n$ vertices and a property $\mathcal{P}$ are given. A black-box access to an unknown subset $S \subseteq V$ is provided via queries of the form `Does $i \in S$?'. We are interested in the minimum number of queries needed in worst case in order to determine whether $G[S]$, the subgraph of $G$ induced on $S$, satisfies $\mathcal{P}$. Apart from being combinatorially rich, this setting allows us to initiate a systematic study of breaking symmetry in the context of query complexity of graph properties. In particular, we focus on hereditary graph properties. The monotone functions in the node-query setting translate precisely to the hereditary graph properties. The famous Evasiveness Conjecture asserts that even with a minimal symmetry assumption on $G$, namely that of vertex-transitivity, the query complexity for any hereditary graph property in our setting is the worst possible, i.e., $n$. We show that in the absence of any symmetry on $G$ it can fall as low as $O(n^{1/(d + 1) })$ where $d$ denotes the minimum possible degree of a minimal forbidden sub-graph for $\mathcal{P}$. In particular, every hereditary property benefits at least quadratically. The main question left open is: can it go exponentially low for some hereditary property? We show that the answer is no for any hereditary property with {finitely many} forbidden subgraphs by exhibiting a bound of $Ω(n^{1/k})$ for some constant $k$ depending only on the property. For general ones we rule out the possibility of the query complexity falling down to constant by showing $Ω(\log n/ \log \log n)$ bound. Interestingly, our lower bound proofs rely on the famous Sunflower Lemma due to Erdös and Rado.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Quantum Query Complexity of Subgraph Isomorphism and Homomorphism

Let $H$ be a fixed graph on $n$ vertices. Let $f_H(G) = 1$ iff the input graph $G$ on $n$ vertices contains $H$ as a (not necessarily induced) subgraph. Let $α_H$ denote the cardinality of a maximum independent set of $H$. In this paper we show: \[Q(f_H) = Ω\left(\sqrt{α_H \cdot n}\right),\] where $Q(f_H)$ denotes the quantum query complexity of $f_H$. As a consequence we obtain a lower bounds for $Q(f_H)$ in terms of several other parameters of $H$ such as the average degree, minimum vertex cover, chromatic number, and the critical probability. We also use the above bound to show that $Q(f_H) = Ω(n^{3/4})$ for any $H$, improving on the previously best known bound of $Ω(n^{2/3})$. Until very recently, it was believed that the quantum query complexity is at least square root of the randomized one. Our $Ω(n^{3/4})$ bound for $Q(f_H)$ matches the square root of the current best known bound for the randomized query complexity of $f_H$, which is $Ω(n^{3/2})$ due to Gröger. Interestingly, the randomized bound of $Ω(α_H \cdot n)$ for $f_H$ still remains open. We also study the Subgraph Homomorphism Problem, denoted by $f_{[H]}$, and show that $Q(f_{[H]}) = Ω(n)$. Finally we extend our results to the $3$-uniform hypergraphs. In particular, we show an $Ω(n^{4/5})$ bound for quantum query complexity of the Subgraph Isomorphism, improving on the previously known $Ω(n^{3/4})$ bound. For the Subgraph Homomorphism, we obtain an $Ω(n^{3/2})$ bound for the same.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

New Bounds for the Garden-Hose Model

We show new results about the garden-hose model. Our main results include improved lower bounds based on non-deterministic communication complexity (leading to the previously unknown $Θ(n)$ bounds for Inner Product mod 2 and Disjointness), as well as an $O(n\cdot \log^3 n)$ upper bound for the Distributed Majority function (previously conjectured to have quadratic complexity). We show an efficient simulation of formulae made of AND, OR, XOR gates in the garden-hose model, which implies that lower bounds on the garden-hose complexity $GH(f)$ of the order $Ω(n^{2+ε})$ will be hard to obtain for explicit functions. Furthermore we study a time-bounded variant of the model, in which even modest savings in time can lead to exponential lower bounds on the size of garden-hose protocols.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Two Results about Quantum Messages

We show two results about the relationship between quantum and classical messages. Our first contribution is to show how to replace a quantum message in a one-way communication protocol by a deterministic message, establishing that for all partial Boolean functions $f:\{0,1\}^n\times\{0,1\}^m\to\{0,1\}$ we have $D^{A\to B}(f)\leq O(Q^{A\to B,*}(f)\cdot m)$. This bound was previously known for total functions, while for partial functions this improves on results by Aaronson, in which either a log-factor on the right hand is present, or the left hand side is $R^{A\to B}(f)$, and in which also no entanglement is allowed. In our second contribution we investigate the power of quantum proofs over classical proofs. We give the first example of a scenario, where quantum proofs lead to exponential savings in computing a Boolean function. The previously only known separation between the power of quantum and classical proofs is in a setting where the input is also quantum. We exhibit a partial Boolean function $f$, such that there is a one-way quantum communication protocol receiving a quantum proof (i.e., a protocol of type QMA) that has cost $O(\log n)$ for $f$, whereas every one-way quantum protocol for $f$ receiving a classical proof (protocol of type QCMA) requires communication $Ω(\sqrt n/\log n)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access