MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320487114 · doi:10.1137/18m1233418

Inapproximability of Matrix \(\boldsymbol{p \rightarrow q}\) Norms

2023· article· en· W4320487114 on OpenAlexaff
Vijay Bhattiprolu, Mrinal K. Ghosh, Venkatesan Guruswami, Euiwoong Lee, Madhur Tulsiani

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Computing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSimons Institute for the Theory of Computing, University of California BerkeleyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsHardness of approximationApproximation algorithmExponential time hypothesisMatrix (chemical analysis)Norm (philosophy)Matrix normExponential functionConstant (computer programming)Discrete mathematicsTime complexityComputer sciencePhysicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

.We study the problem of computing the \(p\rightarrow q\) norm of a matrix \(A \in{\mathbb{R}}^{m \times n}\) , defined as \( \|A\|_{p\rightarrow q} \:= \max _{x \in{\mathbb{R}}^n \setminus \{0\}} \frac{\|Ax\|_{q}}{\|x\|_{p}}\) . This problem generalizes the spectral norm of a matrix ( \(p=q=2\) ) and the Grothendieck problem ( \(p=\infty\) , \(q=1\) ) and has been widely studied in various regimes. When \(p \geq q\) , the problem exhibits a dichotomy: constant factor approximation algorithms are known if \(2 \in{[q,p]}\) , and the problem is hard to approximate within almost polynomial factors when \(2 \notin{[q,p]}\) . The regime when \(p \lt q\) , known as hypercontractive norms, is particularly significant for various applications but much less well understood. The case with \(p=2\) and \(q \gt 2\) was studied by Barak et al. [Proceedings of the 44th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2012, pp. 307–326], who gave subexponential algorithms for a promise version of the problem (which captures small-set expansion) and also proved hardness of approximation results based on the exponential time hypothesis. However, no NP-hardness of approximation is known for these problems for any \(p \lt q\) . We prove the first NP-hardness result (under randomized reductions) for approximating hypercontractive norms. We show that for any \(1\lt p \lt q \lt \infty\) with \(2 \notin{[p,q]}\) , \(\|A\|_{p\rightarrow q}\) is hard to approximate within \(2^{O((\log n)^{1-\epsilon })}\) assuming \(\textrm{NP} \not \subseteq \textrm{BPTIME}(2^{(\log n)^{O(1)}})\) . En route to the above result, we also prove almost tight results for the case when \(p \geq q\) with \(2 \in{[q,p]}\) .Keywordsoperator normscontinuous optimizationinapproximabilityMSC codes689046

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on ComputingSame topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207