On the (Classical and Quantum) Fine-Grained Complexity of Approximate CVP and Max-Cut
Abstract
We show a linear-size reduction from gap Max-2-Lin(2) (a generalization of the gap Max-Cut problem) to γ-CVPp for γ = O(1) and finite p≥ 1, as well as a no-go theorem against poly-sized non-adaptive quantum reductions from k-SAT to CVP2. This implies three headline results: (i) Faster algorithms for γ-CVP are also faster algorithms for Max-2-Lin(2) and Max-Cut. Depending on the approximation regime, even a 20.78n-time or 20.3n-time algorithm would improve upon the state-of-the-art algorithm such as Williams' 2004 algorithm [Theoretical Computer Science 2005] or Arora et al.'s 2010 algorithm [Journal of the ACM 2015]. This provides evidence that γ-CVP for γ=O(1) requires exponential time, improving upon the previous lower-bound for γ<3 by Bennett et al. [arxiv:1704.03928]. (ii) A new almost 2(1/2+/4+o(1))n-time classical algorithm and a new almost 2(1/3+/6+o(1))n-time quantum algorithm for (1-,1-)-gap Max-2-Lin(2). This algorithm is faster than the algorithm of Arora et al., as well as the algorithm of Williams, and the algorithm of Manurangsi and Trevisan [arxiv:1807.09898] when c0 <<c1 for some constants c0, c1. (iii) If the Quantum Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (QSETH) can be used to show a 2δ n-time lower-bound for Max-Cut, Max-2-Lin(2), or CVP2 for any constant δ>0, it must be via an adaptive quantum reduction unless NP ⊂eq pr-QSZK. This illuminates some difficulties in characterizing the hardness of approximate CSPs and shows that the post-quantum security of lattice-based cryptography likely cannot be supported by QSETH.
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.