Paper detail

Testing systems of real quadratic equations for approximate solutions

Consider systems of equations $q_i(x)=0$, where $q_i: {\Bbb R}^n \longrightarrow {\Bbb R}$, $i=1, \ldots, m$, are quadratic forms. Our goal is to tell efficiently systems with many non-trivial solutions or near-solutions $x \ne 0$ from systems that are far from having a solution. For that, we pick a delta-shaped penalty function $F: {\Bbb R} \longrightarrow [0, 1]$ with $F(0)=1$ and $F(y) < 1$ for $y \ne 0$ and compute the expectation of $F(q_1(x)) \cdots F(q_m(x))$ for a random $x$ sampled from the standard Gaussian measure in ${\Bbb R}^n$. We choose $F(y)=y^{-2}\sin^2 y$ and show that the expectation can be approximated within relative error $0< ε< 1$ in quasi-polynomial time $(m+n)^{O(\ln (m+n)-\ln ε)}$, provided each form $q_i$ depends on not more than $r$ real variables, has common variables with at most $r-1$ other forms and satisfies $|q_i(x)| \leq γ\|x\|^2/r$, where $γ>0$ is an absolute constant. This allows us to distinguish between &#34;easily solvable&#34; and &#34;badly unsolvable&#34; systems in some non-trivial situations.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.