Function Technique Eduardo Pinheiro Paul Ilardi Athanasios E. Papathanasiou The.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Complexity Theory Lecture 6
Advertisements

Theory of NP-Completeness
Hem-Ogi 2.1: One Way Functions GEM Group 2: Benjamin Van Durme Pin Lu Ross Messing Shivashankar Balu Tanushree Mittal.
Lecture 9. Resource bounded KC K-, and C- complexities depend on unlimited computational resources. Kolmogorov himself first observed that we can put resource.
One-Way Functions David Lagakos Yutao Zhong April 2, 2001.
Complexity Classes: P and NP
Time Complexity P vs NP.
Many-to-one Trapdoor Functions and their Relations to Public-key Cryptosystems M. Bellare S. Halevi A. Saha S. Vadhan.
Isolation Technique April 16, 2001 Jason Ku Tao Li.
Lecture 24 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck
1 Nondeterministic Space is Closed Under Complement Presented by Jing Zhang and Yingbo Wang Theory of Computation II Professor: Geoffrey Smith.
The class NP Section 7.3 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Chapter 5 The Witness Reduction Technique: Feasible Closure Properties of #P Greg Goldstein Andrew Learn 18 April 2001.
Lecture 21 Nondeterministic Polynomial time, and the class NP FIT2014 Theory of Computation Monash University Faculty of Information Technology Slides.
Having Proofs for Incorrectness
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Chapter 8 The Theory of NP-Completeness.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Discussion3: Uses of the Pumping Lemma Prof. Amos Israeli.
Complexity 15-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Computability and Complexity 22-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Complexity 13-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Computability and Complexity 14-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Cook’s Theorem.
Complexity 18-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Probabilistic Algorithms.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture12: Reductions Prof. Amos Israeli.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture4: Non Regular Languages Prof. Amos Israeli.
FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY Read sections 7.1 – 7.3 of the book for next time.
CS 454 Theory of Computation Sonoma State University, Fall 2011 Instructor: B. (Ravi) Ravikumar Office: 116 I Darwin Hall Original slides by Vahid and.
1 Polynomial Time Reductions Polynomial Computable function : For any computes in polynomial time.
Validating Streaming XML Documents Luc Segoufin & Victor Vianu Presented by Harel Paz.
Chapter 1 The Self-Reducibility Technique Matt Boutell and Bill Scherer CSC 486 April 4, 2001.
Submitted by : Estrella Eisenberg Yair Kaufman Ohad Lipsky Riva Gonen Shalom.
Complexity 19-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov More Probabilistic Algorithms.
–Def: A language L is in BPP c,s ( 0  s(n)  c(n)  1,  n  N) if there exists a probabilistic poly-time TM M s.t. : 1.  w  L, Pr[M accepts w]  c(|w|),
CS Master – Introduction to the Theory of Computation Jan Maluszynski - HT Lecture NP-Completeness Jan Maluszynski, IDA, 2007
February 20, 2015CS21 Lecture 191 CS21 Decidability and Tractability Lecture 19 February 20, 2015.
On Everlasting Security in the Hybrid Bounded Storage Model Danny Harnik Moni Naor.
1 Reducibility. 2 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
Foundations of Cryptography Lecture 2 Lecturer: Moni Naor.
The Theory of NP-Completeness 1. Nondeterministic algorithms A nondeterminstic algorithm consists of phase 1: guessing phase 2: checking If the checking.
The Theory of NP-Completeness 1. What is NP-completeness? Consider the circuit satisfiability problem Difficult to answer the decision problem in polynomial.
Chapter 11 Limitations of Algorithm Power. Lower Bounds Lower bound: an estimate on a minimum amount of work needed to solve a given problem Examples:
1 The Theory of NP-Completeness 2012/11/6 P: the class of problems which can be solved by a deterministic polynomial algorithm. NP : the class of decision.
Computational Complexity Theory Lecture 2: Reductions, NP-completeness, Cook-Levin theorem Indian Institute of Science.
1 1 CDT314 FABER Formal Languages, Automata and Models of Computation Lecture 15-1 Mälardalen University 2012.
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing November 29, 2005.
Week 10Complexity of Algorithms1 Hard Computational Problems Some computational problems are hard Despite a numerous attempts we do not know any efficient.
1 The Theory of NP-Completeness 2 Cook ’ s Theorem (1971) Prof. Cook Toronto U. Receiving Turing Award (1982) Discussing difficult problems: worst case.
Interactive proof systems Section 10.4 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
Umans Complexity Theory Lectures Lecture 1a: Problems and Languages.
Math 344 Winter 07 Group Theory Part 2: Subgroups and Isomorphism
Donghyun (David) Kim Department of Mathematics and Computer Science North Carolina Central University 1 Chapter 7 Time Complexity Some slides are in courtesy.
NPC.
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
Complexity 24-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Interactive Proofs.
Lecture. Today Problem set 9 out (due next Thursday) Topics: –Complexity Theory –Optimization versus Decision Problems –P and NP –Efficient Verification.
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing December 2, 2004.
One Way Functions Chapter 2, Lane-Ogi, Group B Yang Feng Anis Zaman Ethan Johnson Amin Mosayyebzadeh Fall 2015, Midterm II 1.
The Theory of NP-Completeness 1. Nondeterministic algorithms A nondeterminstic algorithm consists of phase 1: guessing phase 2: checking If the checking.
Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz 1 Our First NP-Complete Problem The Cook-Levin theorem A B C.
The NP class. NP-completeness Lecture2. The NP-class The NP class is a class that contains all the problems that can be decided by a Non-Deterministic.
Theory of Computational Complexity Probability and Computing Chapter Hikaru Inada Iwama and Ito lab M1.
The Theory of NP-Completeness
NP-Completeness A problem is NP-complete if: It is in NP
The NP class. NP-completeness
Probabilistic Algorithms
Computational Complexity
Time Complexity We use a multitape Turing machine
Time Complexity Classes
Our First NP-Complete Problem
The Theory of NP-Completeness
Theory of Computability
Presentation transcript:

Function Technique Eduardo Pinheiro Paul Ilardi Athanasios E. Papathanasiou The

Outline Intro Basic Definitions One-way functions and the Classes P, NP, UP Unambiguous and Bounded Ambiguity one-way functions A look to the next talk...

Intro One-way functions are important for –Cryptography: Key components in the construction of protocols. –Complexity Theory: Unsuccessfully used to show that there exist two NP-complete sets that are not the same set in disguise. Their existence is unknown. BUT: Good candidates have been found. And complete characterizations. They exist: –if and only if two famous complexity classes are different. –if and only if pseudo-random generators exist (average-case cryptography).

Basic Definitions Function: ƒ:A B is a binary relation between A and B which includes at most one pair, a in A, b in B. Domain: The set of all x: Range: The set of all y: Total Function: Its domain coincides with A. Partial or Non-Total: otherwise Injective or 1-to-1: Surjective: B = Range(ƒ) Bijective: Both injective and surjective.

Definitions: Invertible Functions It is Poly-Time Invertible if there is a polynomial-time computable function g such that: f(y) chug g y

Definitions: Honest Functions A (possibly non-total) function is honest if: Each element of y of the range of f has some inverse whose length is at most polynomially longer than the length of y.

Non-Honesty Example Nope, because length(x) is exponentially longer than length(f(x)). Are you being honest, function?

Definitions:One-Way Functions A (possibly non-total) function f is one-way if: 1. f is polynomial-time computable, 2. f is not polynomial-time invertible, and 3. f is honest.

Importance of Honesty Condition The non-poly-time-invertability of our example function is just an artifact of the dramatically length-decreasing nature of f. Not-helpful in Cryptography Neither in Theory So, the honesty condition reassures us that if f is not poly- time invertible the reason is not a length trick

UP, UP k Definitions L UP iff there is a NDTM N, that: –accepts L, –N(x) has exactly 1 accepting path for x L, L is in UP k iff there is a NDTM N that: –accepts L, –N(x) has at most k accepting paths for x L.

Theorem 1: One-way functions exist if and only if P NP. Proof: Assume P NP. Let A be in NP-P. There exist NPTM N such that A = L(N). Consider: 0x, if y is an accepting path of N(x) f( ) = 1x, otherwise First Theorem NPTM N

Suppose that f can be polynomial-time inverted by g as follows: –On any input y: g(0x) =, test if y is an accepting path of N(x). If so, accept, otherwise reject. But then A P! Our assumption was that A NP-P. First Theorem (cont.) NP P P P So f is a polynomial-time computable, honest function that is not polynomial-time invertible, i.e. ONE-WAY! CONTRADICTION!!!

Proof: Assume f is a one-way function. Let p be the honesty polynomial for f. Consider the following language: L is clearly in NP. If L were in P, we could invert it by prefix search: This search grows polynomially, bounded by p(|z|). First Theorem (cont.) Is in L? If so, is f( )=z? If yes, function is invertable. Is in L? If so, is f(0)=z? If yes, function is invertable with prefix 0 else check if is in L? If so, is f(1 )=z? If yes, function is inverted with 1 as a prefix. Next do the same with the second bit. This can be used to find each bit successively.

One-to-one one-way functions exist if and only if P UP. But, before the proof, some definitions: One-to-one functions are UP is the class of sets accepted by polynomial-time bounded non-deterministic machines which have at most one accepting path for any inputs. First Theorem (Part II) Good, Good!

One-to-one one-way functions exist if and only if P UP. Similar proof, but 0x, if y is an accepting path of N(x) f( ) = 1, otherwise. f is clearly one-to-one. The rest of the proof goes exactly the same way as before. The only if part changes: assume one-to-one one-way functions exist and f is such a function. L is in UP due to fs one-to-oneness. First Theorem (Part II)

We now know: if P NP, one-way functions exist. First Theorem (Alternate Proof) But what is this function? Aha! SAT is a candidate! The SAT function: dom(f sat ) = { } f is a representation of an n-valued satisfiable boolean formula. is the lexcographically smallest satisfying assignment of f. f sat ( ) = f for every in dom(f sat ) The SAT function: dom(f sat ) = { } f is a representation of an n-valued satisfiable boolean formula. is a satisfying assignment of f. f sat ( ) = f for every in dom(f sat )

Unambiguous and Bounded Ambiguity one- way functions Since P UP NP, proving P UP is stronger than P NP. In other words, P UP P NP. However the converse is unknown: –In some relativized worlds, P=UP and UP NP. –While in others, P UP and UP=NP. Given the above, it is possible that one-way functions exist but no one-to-one one-way functions exist. However, it has been proven constant-to-one one-way functions exist if and only if one-to-one one-way functions exist.

Ambiguity Definitions A k-to-1 function is a function for which maps no more than k values to a single value. A function has bounded ambiguity if there is a k such that the function is k-to-1. A language is UP k for k 1 if there is a NPTM that accepts the language and for all input there are at most k accepting paths

Theorem 2 Unambiguous (one-to-one) one-way functions exist iff bounded-ambiguity (k-to-1) one-way functions exist. The only-if part is trivial because one-to-one one-way functions have bounded ambiguity. The if part is more difficult...

Theorem 2 (cont) Lemma 17: Given a NPTM N which has at most k accepting paths, the following language B UP –B={x | N(x) has exactly k accepting paths} –Proof: Guess k unique lexicographically ordered paths of N. Check if all k paths are accepted by N. If yes accept. –This will have at most one accepting path.

If Part Proof by induction of P=UP P=UP k –Base case: P=UP P=UP 1 Clearly holds –Induction step: P=UP k P=UP k+1 Assume P=UP Let N be an NPTM that accepts a UP k+1 member language L.17: B={x | N(x) has exactly k+1 accepting paths} UP=P

If Part (cont) Assume D={x | x B ^ x L(N)} D UP k By P=UP k : D P Since L(N) = B D and P is closed under –L(N) P –So, P=UP k+1

If Part (cont) We proved P=UP P=UP k Also, it is easy to prove k-to-1 one-way functions exist iff P UP k So, k-to-1 one way functions exist iff P UP. By Thm.1 k-to-1 one way functions exist iff 1-to-1 one way functions exist.

Summary Proven –P NP One-way functions exist. –P UP One-to-one one-way functions exist. –1-to-1 one-way functions exist iff k-to-1 one-way functions exist. The future: –Extremely powerful types of one-way functions exist iff the standard types exist.

P = NP!!! HELP!!! THE END One-way function