Paper detail

Testing Equivalence of Polynomials under Shifts

Two polynomials $f, g \in \mathbb{F}[x_1, \ldots, x_n]$ are called shift-equivalent if there exists a vector $(a_1, \ldots, a_n) \in \mathbb{F}^n$ such that the polynomial identity $f(x_1+a_1, \ldots, x_n+a_n) \equiv g(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ holds. Our main result is a new randomized algorithm that tests whether two given polynomials are shift equivalent. Our algorithm runs in time polynomial in the circuit size of the polynomials, to which it is given black box access. This complements a previous work of Grigoriev (Theoretical Computer Science, 1997) who gave a deterministic algorithm running in time $n^{O(d)}$ for degree $d$ polynomials. Our algorithm uses randomness only to solve instances of the Polynomial Identity Testing (PIT) problem. Hence, if one could de-randomize PIT (a long-standing open problem in complexity) a de-randomization of our algorithm would follow. This establishes an equivalence between de-randomizing shift-equivalence testing and de-randomizing PIT (both in the black-box and the white-box setting). For certain restricted models, such as Read Once Branching Programs, we already obtain a deterministic algorithm using existing PIT results.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.