Paper detail

Simulating Branching Programs with Edit Distance and Friends or: A Polylog Shaved is a Lower Bound Made

A recent and active line of work achieves tight lower bounds for fundamental problems under the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH). A celebrated result of Backurs and Indyk (STOC'15) proves that the Edit Distance of two sequences of length n cannot be computed in strongly subquadratic time under SETH. The result was extended by follow-up works to simpler looking problems like finding the Longest Common Subsequence (LCS). SETH is a very strong assumption, asserting that even linear size CNF formulas cannot be analyzed for satisfiability with an exponential speedup over exhaustive search. We consider much safer assumptions, e.g. that such a speedup is impossible for SAT on much more expressive representations, like NC circuits. Intuitively, this seems much more plausible: NC circuits can implement complex cryptographic primitives, while CNFs cannot even approximately compute an XOR of bits. Our main result is a surprising reduction from SAT on Branching Programs to fundamental problems in P like Edit Distance, LCS, and many others. Truly subquadratic algorithms for these problems therefore have consequences that we consider to be far more remarkable than merely faster CNF SAT algorithms. For example, SAT on arbitrary o(n)-depth bounded fan-in circuits (and therefore also NC-Circuit-SAT) can be solved in (2-eps)^n time. A very interesting feature of our work is that we can prove major consequences even from mildly subquadratic algorithms for Edit Distance or LCS. For example, we show that if we can shave an arbitrarily large polylog factor from n^2 for Edit Distance then NEXP does not have non-uniform NC^1 circuits. A more fine-grained examination shows that even shaving a $\log^c{n}$ factor, for a specific constant $c \approx 10^3$, already implies new circuit lower bounds.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.