MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Circuit Lower Bounds for the p-Spin Optimization Problem

2024· article· en· W3196437393 on OpenAlexaff
David Gamarnik, Aukosh Jagannath, Alexander S. Wein

Bibliographic record

VenueMarkov Processes And Related Fields · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsSpin (aerodynamics)MathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsCombinatoricsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of finding a near ground state of a p-spin model with Rademacher couplings by means of a low-depth circuit. As a direct extension of the authors' recent work [GJW20], we establish that any poly-size n-output circuit that produces a spin assignment with objective value within a certain constant factor of optimality, must have depth at least log n=(2 log log n) as n grows. This is stronger than the known state of the art bounds of the form (log n=(k(n) log log n)) for similar combinatorial optimization problems, where k(n) depends on the optimality value. For example, for the largest clique problem k(n) corresponds to the square of the size of the clique [Ros10]. At the same time our results are not quite comparable since in our case the circuits are required to produce a solution itself rather than solving the associated decision problem. As in our earlier work [GJW20], the approach is based on the overlap gap property (OGP) exhibited by random p-spin models, but the derivation of the circuit lower bound relies further on standard facts from Fourier analysis on the Boolean cube, in particular the Linial-Mansour-Nisan Theorem. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first instance when methods from spin glass theory have ramifications for circuit complexity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarkov Processes And Related FieldsSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207