MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7109950510 · doi:10.4230/lipics.icalp.2025.28

Faster & Deterministic FPT Algorithm for Worst-Case Tensor Decomposition

2025· article· en· W7109950510 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTensor (intrinsic definition)DecompositionDeterministic algorithmRank (graph theory)Cluster analysisTime complexityState (computer science)Randomized algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a deterministic 2^{k^{𝒪(1)}} poly(n,d) time algorithm for decomposing d-dimensional, width-n tensors of rank at most k over ℝ and ℂ. This improves upon the previous randomized algorithm of Peleg, Shpilka, and Volk (ITCS '24) that takes 2^{k^{k^{𝒪(k)}}} poly(n,d) time and the deterministic n^k^k time algorithms of Bhargava, Saraf, and Volkovich (STOC '21). Our work resolves an open question asked by Peleg, Shpilka, and Volk (ITCS '24) on whether a deterministic Fixed Parameter Tractable (FPT) algorithm exists for worst-case tensor decomposition. We also make substantial progress on the fundamental problem of how the tractability of tensor decomposition varies as the tensor rank increases. Our result implies that we can achieve deterministic polynomial-time decomposition as long as the rank of the tensor is at most (log n)^{1/C}, where C is some fixed constant independent of n and d. Further, we note that there cannot exist a polynomial-time algorithm for k = ω(log n) unless ETH fails. Our algorithm works for all fields; however, the time complexity worsens to 2^{k^{k^{𝒪(1)}}} and requires randomization for finite fields of large characteristics. Both conditions are provably necessary unless there are improvements in the state of the art for system solving over the corresponding fields. Our approach achieves this by designing a proper learning (reconstruction) algorithm for set-multilinear depth-3 arithmetic circuits. On a technical note, we design a "partial" clustering algorithm for set-multilinear depth-3 arithmetic circuits that lets us isolate a cluster from any set-multilinear depth-3 circuit while preserving the structure of the circuit.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.007

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207