Misplaced Pages

Sipser–Lautemann theorem

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Bounded-error probabilistic polynomial time is contained in the polynomial time hierarchy

In computational complexity theory, the Sipser–Lautemann theorem or Sipser–Gács–Lautemann theorem states that bounded-error probabilistic polynomial (BPP) time is contained in the polynomial time hierarchy, and more specifically Σ2 ∩ Π2.

In 1983, Michael Sipser showed that BPP is contained in the polynomial time hierarchy. Péter Gács showed that BPP is actually contained in Σ2 ∩ Π2. Clemens Lautemann contributed by giving a simple proof of BPP’s membership in Σ2 ∩ Π2, also in 1983. It is conjectured that in fact BPP=P, which is a much stronger statement than the Sipser–Lautemann theorem.

Proof

Here we present the proof by Lautemann. Without loss of generality, a machine M ∈ BPP with error ≤ 2 can be chosen. (All BPP problems can be amplified to reduce the error probability exponentially.) The basic idea of the proof is to define a Σ2 sentence that is equivalent to stating that x is in the language, L, defined by M by using a set of transforms of the random variable inputs.

Since the output of M depends on random input, as well as the input x, it is useful to define which random strings produce the correct output as A(x) = {r | M(x,r) accepts}. The key to the proof is to note that when x ∈ L, A(x) is very large and when x ∉ L, A(x) is very small. By using bitwise parity, ⊕, a set of transforms can be defined as A(x) ⊕ t={r ⊕ t | r ∈ A(x)}. The first main lemma of the proof shows that the union of a small finite number of these transforms will contain the entire space of random input strings. Using this fact, a Σ2 sentence and a Π2 sentence can be generated that is true if and only if x ∈ L (see conclusion).

Lemma 1

The general idea of lemma one is to prove that if A(x) covers a large part of the random space R = { 1 , 0 } | r | {\displaystyle R=\{1,0\}^{|r|}} then there exists a small set of translations that will cover the entire random space. In more mathematical language:

If | A ( x ) | | R | ≥ 1 − 1 2 | x | {\displaystyle {\frac {|A(x)|}{|R|}}\geq 1-{\frac {1}{2^{|x|}}}} , then ∃ t 1 , t 2 , … , t | r | {\displaystyle \exists t_{1},t_{2},\ldots ,t_{|r|}} , where t i ∈ { 1 , 0 } | r | {\displaystyle t_{i}\in \{1,0\}^{|r|}} such that ⋃ i A ( x ) ⊕ t i = R . {\displaystyle \bigcup _{i}A(x)\oplus t_{i}=R.}

Proof. Randomly pick t1, t2, ..., t|r|. Let S = ⋃ i A ( x ) ⊕ t i {\displaystyle S=\bigcup _{i}A(x)\oplus t_{i}} (the union of all transforms of A(x)).

So, for all r in R,

Pr [ r ∉ S ] = Pr [ r ∉ A ( x ) ⊕ t 1 ] ⋅ Pr [ r ∉ A ( x ) ⊕ t 2 ] ⋯ Pr [ r ∉ A ( x ) ⊕ t | r | ] ≤ 1 2 | x | ⋅ | r | . {\displaystyle \Pr=\Pr\cdot \Pr\cdots \Pr\leq {\frac {1}{2^{|x|\cdot |r|}}}.}

The probability that there will exist at least one element in R not in S is

Pr [ ⋁ i ( r i ∉ S ) ] ≤ ∑ i 1 2 | x | ⋅ | r | = 2 | r | 2 | x | ⋅ | r | < 1. {\displaystyle \Pr {\Bigl }\leq \sum _{i}{\frac {1}{2^{|x|\cdot |r|}}}={\frac {2^{|r|}}{2^{|x|\cdot |r|}}}<1.}

Therefore

Pr [ S = R ] ≥ 1 − 2 | r | 2 | x | ⋅ | r | > 0. {\displaystyle \Pr\geq 1-{\frac {2^{|r|}}{2^{|x|\cdot |r|}}}>0.}

Thus there is a selection for each t 1 , t 2 , … , t | r | {\displaystyle t_{1},t_{2},\ldots ,t_{|r|}} such that

⋃ i A ( x ) ⊕ t i = R . {\displaystyle \bigcup _{i}A(x)\oplus t_{i}=R.}

Lemma 2

The previous lemma shows that A(x) can cover every possible point in the space using a small set of translations. Complementary to this, for x ∉ L only a small fraction of the space is covered by S = ⋃ i A ( x ) ⊕ t i {\displaystyle S=\bigcup _{i}A(x)\oplus t_{i}} . We have:

| S | | R | ≤ | r | ⋅ | A ( x ) | | R | ≤ | r | ⋅ 2 − | x | < 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {|S|}{|R|}}\leq |r|\cdot {\frac {|A(x)|}{|R|}}\leq |r|\cdot 2^{-|x|}<1}

because | r | {\displaystyle |r|} is polynomial in | x | {\displaystyle |x|} .

Conclusion

The lemmas show that language membership of a language in BPP can be expressed as a Σ2 expression, as follows.

x ∈ L ⟺ ∃ t 1 , t 2 , … , t | r | ∀ r ∈ R ⋁ 1 ≤ i ≤ | r | ( M ( x , r ⊕ t i )  accepts ) . {\displaystyle x\in L\iff \exists t_{1},t_{2},\dots ,t_{|r|}\,\forall r\in R\bigvee _{1\leq i\leq |r|}(M(x,r\oplus t_{i}){\text{ accepts}}).}

That is, x is in language L if and only if there exist | r | {\displaystyle |r|} binary vectors, where for all random bit vectors r, TM M accepts at least one random vector ⊕ ti.

The above expression is in Σ2 in that it is first existentially then universally quantified. Therefore BPP ⊆ Σ2. Because BPP is closed under complement, this proves BPP ⊆ Σ2 ∩ Π2.

Stronger version

The theorem can be strengthened to B P P ⊆ M A ⊆ S 2 P ⊆ Σ 2 ∩ Π 2 {\displaystyle {\mathsf {BPP}}\subseteq {\mathsf {MA}}\subseteq {\mathsf {S}}_{2}^{P}\subseteq \Sigma _{2}\cap \Pi _{2}} (see MA, S
2).

References

  1. Sipser, Michael (1983). "A complexity theoretic approach to randomness". Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM Press: 330–335. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.472.8218.
  2. ^ Lautemann, Clemens (1983). "BPP and the polynomial hierarchy". Inf. Proc. Lett. 17. 17 (4): 215–217. doi:10.1016/0020-0190(83)90044-3.
  3. Canetti, Ran (1996). "More on BPP and the polynomial-time hierarchy". Information Processing Letters. 57 (5): 237–241. doi:10.1016/0020-0190(96)00016-6.
  4. Russell, Alexander; Sundaram, Ravi (1998). "Symmetric alternation captures BPP". Computational Complexity. 7 (2): 152–162. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.219.3028. doi:10.1007/s000370050007. ISSN 1016-3328. S2CID 15331219.
Categories: