Abstract
We show that proving results such as \(\mathcal{BPP}=\mathcal{P}\) essentially necessitate the construction of suitable pseudorandom generators (i.e., generators that suffice for such derandomization results). In particular, the main incarnation of this equivalence refers to the standard notion of uniform derandomization and to the corresponding pseudorandom generators (i.e., the standard uniform notion of “canonical derandomizers”). This equivalence bypasses the question of which hardness assumptions are required for establishing such derandomization results, which has received considerable attention in the last decade or so (starting with Impagliazzo and Wigderson [JCSS, 2001]).
We also identify a natural class of search problems that can be solved by deterministic polynomial-time reductions to \(\mathcal{BPP}\). This result is instrumental to the construction of the aforementioned pseudorandom generators (based on the assumption \(\mathcal{BPP}=\mathcal{P}\)), which is actually a reduction of the “construction problem” to \(\mathcal{BPP}\).
Caveat: Throughout the text, we abuse standard notation by letting \(\mathcal{BPP},\mathcal{P}\) etc denote classes of promise problems. We are aware of the possibility that this choice may annoy some readers, but believe that promise problem actually provide the most adequate formulation of natural decisional problems.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aydinlioglu, B., Gutfreund, D., Hitchcock, J.M., Kawachi, A.: Derandomizing Arthur-Merlin Games and Approximate Counting Implies Exponential-Size Lower Bounds. Computational Complexity (to appear)
Blum, M., Micali, S.: How to Generate Cryptographically Strong Sequences of Pseudo-Random Bits. In: SICOMP, vol. 13, pp. 850–864 (1984); Preliminary version in 23rd FOCS, pp. 80–91 (1982)
Chor, B., Goldreich, O.: On the Power of Two–Point Based Sampling. Jour. of Complexity 5, 96–106 (1989)
Even, S., Selman, A.L., Yacobi, Y.: The Complexity of Promise Problems with Applications to Public-Key Cryptography. Inform. and Control 61, 159–173 (1984)
Fortnow, L.: Comparing Notions of Full Derandomization. In: 16th CCC, pp. 28–34 (2001)
Friedman, J.: A Proof of Alon’s Second Eigenvalue Conjecture. In: 35th STOC, pp. 720–724 (2003)
Gauss, C.F.: Untersuchungen Über Höhere Arithmetik, 2nd edn. Chelsea publishing company, New York (1981) (reprinted)
Goldreich, O.: Foundation of Cryptography: Basic Tools. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
Goldreich, O.: Computational Complexity: A Conceptual Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)
Goldreich, O., Wigderson, A.: On Pseudorandomness with respect to Deterministic Observers. In: RANDOM 2000, Proceedings of the Satellite Workshops of the 27th ICALP. Carleton Scientific (Proc. in Inform. 8), pp. 77–84 (2000); See also ECCC, TR00-056
Goldwasser, S., Micali, S.: Probabilistic Encryption. JCSS 28(2), 270–299 (1984); Preliminary version in 14th STOC (1982)
Grollmann, J., Selman, A.L.: Complexity Measures for Public-Key Cryptosystems. In: SICOMP, vol. 17(2), pp. 309–335 (1988)
Hochbaum, D. (ed.): Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems. PWS (1996)
Huxley, M.N.: On the Difference Between Consecutive Primes. Invent. Math. 15, 164–170 (1972)
Impagliazzo, R., Kabanets, V., Wigderson, A.: In Search of an Easy Witness: Exponential Time vs Probabilistic Polynomial Time. JCSS 65(4), 672–694 (2002); Preliminary version in 16th CCC (2001)
Impagliazzo, R., Wigderson, A.: P=BPP if E requires exponential circuits: Derandomizing the XOR Lemma. In: 29th STOC, pp. 220–229 (1997)
Impagliazzo, R., Wigderson, A.: Randomness vs. Time: De-randomization under a uniform assumption. JCSS 63(4), 672–688 (2001); Preliminary version in 39th FOCS (1998)
Jerrum, M., Valiant, L., Vazirani, V.V.: Random Generation of Combinatorial Structures from a Uniform Distribution. In: TCS, vol. 43, pp. 169–188 (1986)
Kabanets, V., Impagliazzo, R.: Derandomizing Polynomial Identity Tests Means Proving Circuit Lower Bounds. Computational Complexity 13, 1–46 (2003); Preliminary version in 35th STOC (2003)
Nisan, N., Wigderson, A.: Hardness vs Randomness. JCSS 49(2), 149–167 (1994); Preliminary version in 29th FOCS (1988)
Ostrovsky, R., Wigderson, A.: One-Way Functions are Essential for Non-Trivial Zero-Knowledge. In: 2nd Israel Symp. on Theory of Computing and Systems, pp. 3–17. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, Los Alamitos (1993)
Reingold, O., Trevisan, L., Vadhan, S.: Pseudorandom walks on regular digraphs and the RL vs. L problem. In: 38th STOC, pp. 457–466 (2006); See details in ECCC, TR05-022
Shaltiel, R., Umans, C.: Low-end Uniform Hardness vs Randomness Tradeoffs for AM. SICOMP 39(3), 1006–1037 (2009); Preliminary version in 39th STOC (2007)
Trevisan, L., Vadhan, S.: Pseudorandomness and Average-Case Complexity Via Uniform Reductions. Computational Complexity 16(4), 331–364 (2007); Preliminary version in 17th CCC (2002)
Umans, C.: Pseudo-random Generators for all Hardness. JCSS 67(2), 419–440 (2002); Preliminary version in 34th STOC (2002)
Vadhan, S.: An Unconditional Study of Computational Zero Knowledge. SICOMP 36(4), 1160–1214 (2006); Preliminary version in 45th FOCS (2004)
Yao, A.C.: Theory and Application of Trapdoor Functions. In: 23rd FOCS, pp. 80–91 (1982)
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Goldreich, O. (2011). In a World of P=BPP. In: Goldreich, O. (eds) Studies in Complexity and Cryptography. Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6650. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22669-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22670-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)