We gratefully acknowledge support from
the Simons Foundation and member institutions.
Full-text links:

Download:

Current browse context:

cs.CC

Change to browse by:

References & Citations

DBLP - CS Bibliography

Bookmark

(what is this?)
CiteULike logo BibSonomy logo Mendeley logo del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo

Computer Science > Computational Complexity

Title: Fine-grained hardness of CVP(P) -- Everything that we can prove (and nothing else)

Abstract: We show a number of fine-grained hardness results for the Closest Vector Problem in the $\ell_p$ norm ($\mathrm{CVP}_p$), and its approximate and non-uniform variants. First, we show that $\mathrm{CVP}_p$ cannot be solved in $2^{(1-\varepsilon)n}$ time for all $p \notin 2\mathbb{Z}$ and $\varepsilon > 0$, assuming the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH). Second, we extend this by showing that there is no $2^{(1-\varepsilon)n}$-time algorithm for approximating $\mathrm{CVP}_p$ to within a constant factor $\gamma$ for such $p$ assuming a "gap" version of SETH, with an explicit relationship between $\gamma$, $p$, and the arity $k = k(\varepsilon)$ of the underlying hard CSP. Third, we show the same hardness result for (exact) $\mathrm{CVP}_p$ with preprocessing (assuming non-uniform SETH).
For exact "plain" $\mathrm{CVP}_p$, the same hardness result was shown in [Bennett, Golovnev, and Stephens-Davidowitz FOCS 2017] for all but finitely many $p \notin 2\mathbb{Z}$, where the set of exceptions depended on $\varepsilon$ and was not explicit. For the approximate and preprocessing problems, only very weak bounds were known prior to this work.
We also show that the restriction to $p \notin 2\mathbb{Z}$ is in some sense inherent. In particular, we show that no "natural" reduction can rule out even a $2^{3n/4}$-time algorithm for $\mathrm{CVP}_2$ under SETH. For this, we prove that the possible sets of closest lattice vectors to a target in the $\ell_2$ norm have quite rigid structure, which essentially prevents them from being as expressive as $3$-CNFs.
We prove these results using techniques from many different fields, including complex analysis, functional analysis, additive combinatorics, and discrete Fourier analysis. E.g., along the way, we give a new (and tighter) proof of Szemer\'{e}di's cube lemma for the boolean cube.
Subjects: Computational Complexity (cs.CC); Data Structures and Algorithms (cs.DS)
Cite as: arXiv:1911.02440 [cs.CC]
  (or arXiv:1911.02440v3 [cs.CC] for this version)

Submission history

From: Noah Stephens-Davidowitz [view email]
[v1] Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:34:28 GMT (132kb,D)
[v2] Fri, 1 May 2020 16:28:27 GMT (145kb,D)
[v3] Sat, 7 Aug 2021 17:14:43 GMT (149kb,D)

Link back to: arXiv, form interface, contact.