lecture 1 introduction to the sum of squares hierarchy
play

Lecture 1: Introduction to the Sum of Squares Hierarchy Lecture - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lecture 1: Introduction to the Sum of Squares Hierarchy Lecture Outline Part I: Introduction/Motivation Part II: Planted Clique Part III: A Game for Sum of Squares (SOS) Part IV: SOS on General Equations Part V: Overview of SOS


  1. Lecture 1: Introduction to the Sum of Squares Hierarchy

  2. Lecture Outline • Part I: Introduction/Motivation • Part II: Planted Clique • Part III: A Game for Sum of Squares (SOS) • Part IV: SOS on General Equations • Part V: Overview of SOS results and Seminar Plan

  3. Part I: Introduction/Motivation

  4. Goal of Complexity Theory • Fundamental goal of complexity theory: Determine the computational resources (such as time and space) needed to solve problems • Requires upper bounds and lower bounds

  5. Upper Bounds • Requires finding a good algorithm and analyzing its performance. • Traditionally requires great ingenuity (but stay tuned!)

  6. Lower Bounds is impossible! • Requires proving impossibility • Notoriously hard to prove lower bounds on all algorithms (e.g. P versus NP) • If we can’t yet prove lower bounds on all algorithms, what can we do?

  7. Lower Bounds: What we can do is impossible! Path #2 Path #1 Restricted Models: Prove Conditional Lower Bounds: lower bounds on restricted Assume one lower bound, classes of algorithms see what follows (e.g. NP- hardness) Both paths give a deep understanding and warn us what not to try when designing algorithms.

  8. This seminar • This seminar: Analyzing the Sum of Squares (SOS) Hierarchy (a restricted but powerful model)

  9. Why Sum of Squares (SOS)? • Broadly Applicable: Meta-algorithm (framework for designing algorithms) which can be applied to a wide variety of problems. • Effective: Surprisingly powerful. Captures several well-known algorithms (max-cut [GW95], sparsest cut [ARV09], unique games [ABS10]) and is conjectured to be optimal for many combinatorial optimization problems! • Simple: Essentially only uses the fact that squares are non-negative over the real numbers.

  10. SOS for Optimists and Pessimists • Upper bound side: SOS gives algorithms for a wide class of problems which may well be optimal. • Lower bound side: SOS lower bounds give strong evidence of hardness

  11. Part II: Planted Clique

  12. SOS on planted clique • As we’ll see later in the course, SOS is not particularly effective on planted clique • That said, it is an illustrative example for what SOS is. • Also how I got interested in SOS.

  13. Max Clique Problem • Max clique: Given an input graph 𝐻 , what is the size of the largest clique (set of vertices which are all adjacent to each other)? • NP- hard, was in Karp’s original list of NP -hard problems. • This is worst case, how about average case?

  14. Max Clique on Random Graphs • If 𝐻 is a random graph, w.h.p. (with high probability) the maximum size of a clique in 𝐻 is 2 ± 𝑝 1 log 2 𝑜 • Idea: expected number of cliques of size 𝑙 is 2 − 𝑙 𝑜 2 𝑙 • Solving for the 𝑙 which makes this 1 , we obtain that 𝑙 ≈ 2 log 2 𝑜 . • Open problem [Kar76]: Can we find a clique of size 1 + 𝜗 log 2 𝑜 in polynomial time?

  15. Planted Clique • Introduced by Jerrum [Jer92] and Kucera [Kuc95] • Instead of looking for the largest clique in a random graph 𝐻 , what happens if we plant a clique of size 𝑙 ≫ 2 log 2 𝑜 in 𝐻 by taking k vertices in 𝑊(𝐻) and making them all adjacent to each other? • Can we find such a planted k-clique? Can we tell if a k-clique has been planted? • Proof complexity analogue: Can we prove that a random graph has no clique of size k? • Best known algorithm: 𝑙 = Ω( 𝑜) [AKS98]

  16. Planted Clique Example • Random instance: 𝐻 𝑜, 1 2 • Planted instance: 𝐻 𝑜, 1 2 + 𝐿 𝑙 • Example: Which graph has a planted 5-clique? a b a b j c j c i d i d h e h e g f g f

  17. Planted Clique Example • Random instance: 𝐻 𝑜, 1 2 • Planted instance: 𝐻 𝑜, 1 2 + 𝐿 𝑙 • Example: Which graph has a planted 5-clique? a b a b j c j c i d i d h e h e g f g f

  18. Part III: A Game for Sum of Squares (SOS)

  19. Distinguishing via Equations • Recall: Want to distinguish between a random graph and a graph with a planted clique. • Possible method: Write equations for k-clique (k=planted clique size), use a feasibility test to determine if these equations are solvable. • SOS gives a feasibility test for equations.

  20. Equations for 𝑙 -Clique • Variable 𝑦 𝑗 for each vertex i in G. • Want 𝑦 𝑗 = 1 if i is in the clique. • Want 𝑦 𝑗 = 0 if i is not in the clique. • Equations: 2 = 𝑦 𝑗 for all i. 𝑦 𝑗 𝑦 𝑗 𝑦 𝑘 = 0 if 𝑗, 𝑘 ∉ 𝐹(𝐻) σ 𝑗 𝑦 𝑗 = 𝑙 These equations are feasible precisely when G contains a 𝑙 -clique.

  21. A Game for the Sum of Squares Hierarchy • SOS hierarchy: feasibility test for equations, expressible with the following game. • Two players, Optimist and Pessimist • Optimist: Says answer is YES, gives some evidence • Pessimist : Tries to refute Optimist’s evidence • SOS hierarchy computes who wins this game (with optimal play)

  22. What evidence should we ask for? Choice #1: Optimist must give the values for all variables. How do I find Checking this what the is easy! variables are? Pessimist Optimist

  23. What evidence should we ask for? Choice #2: No evidence at all. How do I Yeah, that’s show this is solvable! unsolvable? Pessimist Optimist

  24. What evidence should we ask for? • We want something in the middle. • Optimist’s evidence for degree d SOS hierarchy: expectation values of all monomials up to degree d over some distribution of solutions.

  25. Example: Does 𝐿 4 Have a Triangle? Recall equations: 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 Want 𝑦 𝑗 = 1 if 𝑗 ∈ triangle, 0 otherwise. 2 = 𝑦 𝑗 ∀𝑗, 𝑦 𝑗 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 σ 𝑗 𝑦 𝑗 = 3 G

  26. Example: Does 𝐿 4 Have a Triangle? One option: Optimist can take the trivial distribution with the single solution 𝑦 1 = 𝑦 2 = 𝑦 3 = 1, 𝑦 4 = 0 and give the corresponding values of all monomials up to degree d. 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 Values for 𝑒 = 2 : E[1] = 1 E[ 𝑦 1 ] = E[ 𝑦 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 3 ] = 1 𝑦 4 𝑦 3 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 2 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 3 2 ] = 1 E[ 𝑦 1 G E[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 3 ] = E[ 𝑦 2 𝑦 3 ] = 1 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 4 ] = 0 E[ 𝑦 4 E[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 4 ] = E[ 𝑦 2 𝑦 4 ] = E[ 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 ] = 0.

  27. Example: Does 𝐿 4 Have a Triangle? Another option: Optimist can take each of the 4 triangles in G with probability ¼ (uniform distribution on solutions) Values for 𝑒 = 2 : 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 E[ 1 ] = 1 3 2 ] = E[ 𝑦 𝑗 ] = ∀𝑗 , E[ 𝑦 𝑗 4 ∀𝑗 ≠ 𝑘, E[ 𝑦 𝑗 𝑦 𝑘 ] = 1 𝑦 4 𝑦 3 G 2

  28. Example: Does 𝐷 4 Have a Triangle? Recall equations: 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 Want 𝑦 𝑗 = 1 if 𝑗 ∈ triangle, 0 otherwise. 2 = 𝑦 𝑗 ∀𝑗, 𝑦 𝑗 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 σ 𝑗 𝑦 𝑗 = 3 G 𝑦 1 𝑦 3 = 𝑦 2 𝑦 4 = 0 Here there is no solution, so Optimist has to bluff

  29. Optimist Bluffs Optimist could give the following pseudo- expectation values as “evidence”: ෨ 𝐹 1 = 1 2 = ෨ 3 ∀𝑗, ෨ 𝐹 𝑦 𝑗 𝐹 𝑦 𝑗 = 4 3 𝐹 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 = ෨ ෨ 𝐹 𝑦 2 𝑦 3 = ෨ 𝐹 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 = ෨ 𝐹 𝑦 1 𝑦 4 = 4 𝐹 𝑦 1 𝑦 3 = ෨ ෨ 𝐹 𝑦 2 𝑦 4 = 0 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 G

  30. Detecting Lies How can Pessimist detect lies systematically? Method 1: Check equations! Let’s check some: (all vertices and edges have pseudo-expectation value 3/4) 𝑦 1 + 𝑦 2 + 𝑦 3 + 𝑦 4 = 3 3 Ẽ [𝑦 1 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 2 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 3 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 4 ] = 4 ⋅ 4 = 3 2 + 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 + 𝑦 1 𝑦 3 + 𝑦 1 𝑦 4 = 3𝑦 1 𝑦 1 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 2 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 1 𝑦 2 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 1 𝑦 3 ] + Ẽ [𝑦 1 𝑦 4 ] Ẽ [𝑦 1 = 3/4 + 3/4 + 0 + 3/4 = 9/4 = 3 Ẽ [𝑦 1 ] Equations are satisfied, 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 need something more… G

  31. Detecting Lies How else can Pessimist detect lies? Method 2: Check non-negativity of squares! Ẽ[ (𝑦 1 + 𝑦 3 − 𝑦 2 − 𝑦 4 ) 2 ] = 2 ] + Ẽ[ 𝑦 3 2 ] + Ẽ[ 𝑦 2 2 ] + Ẽ[ 𝑦 4 2 ] Ẽ[ 𝑦 1 + 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 3 ] − 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 ] − 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 1 𝑦 4 ] − 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 3 𝑦 2 ] − 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 ] + 2Ẽ[ 𝑦 2 𝑦 4 ] = 3/4 + 3/4 + 3/4 + 3/4 + 0 𝑦 1 𝑦 2 − 3/2 − 3/2 − 3/2 − 3/2 + 0 = -3 Nonsense! 𝑦 3 𝑦 4 G

  32. Degree d SoS Hierarchy • We restrict Pessimist to these two methods. • Optimist wins if he can come up with pseudo- expectation values Ẽ (up to degree d) which obey all of the required equations and have non-negative value on all squares. • Otherwise, Pessimist wins. • Degree d SOS hierarchy says YES if Optimist wins and NO if Pessimist wins, this gives a feasibility test.

  33. Feasibility Testing with SOS What we want: NO YES Test says YES Test says NO Degree d SoS Hierarchy: NO NO YES Pessimist wins Optimist wins Infeasible, Infeasible, Feasible, test says NO test says YES test says YES

  34. SOS Hierarchy … • Optimist must give more values 𝑒 = 8 • Harder for Optimist to bluff 𝑒 = 6 • Easier for Pessimist to refute 𝑒 = 4 Optimist and win • SOS takes longer to compute winner 𝑒 = 2 Increasing d

  35. Part IV: SOS on general equations

  36. General Setup • Want to know if polynomial equations 𝑡 1 𝑦 1 , … , 𝑦 𝑜 = 0 , 𝑡 2 𝑦 1 , … , 𝑦 𝑜 = 0 , … can be solved simultaneously over ℝ. • Actually quite general, most problems can be formulated in terms of polynomial equations

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend