Lower Bounds for Set-Multilinear Branching Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we prove super-polynomial lower bounds for the model of sum of ordered set-multilinear algebraic branching programs, each with a possibly different ordering (∑smABP). Specifically, we give an explicit nd-variate polynomial of degree d such that any ∑smABP computing it must have size n^ω(1) for d as low as ω(log n). Notably, this constitutes the first such lower bound in the low degree regime. Moreover, for d = poly(n), we demonstrate an exponential lower bound. This result generalizes the seminal work of Nisan (STOC, 1991), which proved an exponential lower bound for a single ordered set-multilinear ABP. The significance of our lower bounds is underscored by the recent work of Bhargav, Dwivedi, and Saxena (TAMC, 2024), which showed that super-polynomial lower bounds against a sum of ordered set-multilinear branching programs - for a polynomial of sufficiently low degree - would imply super-polynomial lower bounds against general ABPs, thereby resolving Valiant’s longstanding conjecture that the permanent polynomial can not be computed efficiently by ABPs. More precisely, their work shows that if one could obtain such lower bounds when the degree is bounded by O(log n/ log log n), then it would imply super-polynomial lower bounds against general ABPs. Our results strengthen the works of Arvind & Raja (Chic. J. Theor. Comput. Sci., 2016) and Bhargav, Dwivedi & Saxena (TAMC, 2024), as well as the works of Ramya & Rao (Theor. Comput. Sci., 2020) and Ghoshal & Rao (International Computer Science Symposium in Russia, 2021), each of which established lower bounds for related or restricted versions of this model. They also strongly answer a question from the former two, which asked to prove super-polynomial lower bounds for general ∑smABP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".