Sharp Thresholds Imply Circuit Lower Bounds: from random 2-SAT to Planted Clique

Abstract

We show that sharp thresholds for Boolean functions directly imply average-case circuit lower bounds. More formally we show that any Boolean function exhibiting a sharp enough threshold at arbitrary critical density cannot be computed by Boolean circuits of bounded depth and polynomial size. We also prove a partial converse: if a monotone graph invariant Boolean function does not have a sharp threshold then it can be computed on average by a Boolean circuit of bounded depth and polynomial size. Our general result also implies new average-case bounded depth circuit lower bounds in a variety of settings. (a) (k-cliques) For k=(n), we prove that any circuit of depth d deciding the presence of a size k clique in a random graph requires exponential-in-n(1/d) size. (b)(random 2-SAT) We prove that any circuit of depth d deciding the satisfiability of a random 2-SAT formula requires exponential-in-n(1/d) size. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first bounded depth circuit lower bound for random k-SAT for any value of k ≥ 2. Our results also provide the first rigorous lower bound in agreement with a conjectured, but debated, "computational hardness" of random k-SAT around its satisfiability threshold. (c)(Statistical estimation -- planted k-clique) Over the recent years, multiple statistical estimation problems have also been proven to exhibit a "statistical" sharp threshold, called the All-or-Nothing (AoN) phenomenon. We show that AoN also implies circuit lower bounds for statistical problems. As a simple corollary of that, we prove that any circuit of depth d that solves to information-theoretic optimality a "dense" variant of the celebrated planted k-clique problem requires exponential-in-n(1/d) size.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…