skip to main content
10.1145/3519935.3520025acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Ideals, determinants, and straightening: proving and using lower bounds for polynomial ideals

Published: 10 June 2022 Publication History

Abstract

We show that any nonzero polynomial in the ideal generated by the r × r minors of an n × n matrix X can be used to efficiently approximate the determinant. Specifically, for any nonzero polynomial f in this ideal, we construct a small depth-three f-oracle circuit that approximates the Θ(r1/3) × Θ(r1/3) determinant in the sense of border complexity. For many classes of algebraic circuits, this implies that every nonzero polynomial in the ideal generated by r × r minors is at least as hard to approximately compute as the Θ(r1/3) × Θ(r1/3) determinant. We also prove an analogous result for the Pfaffian of a 2n × 2n skew-symmetric matrix and the ideal generated by Pfaffians of 2r × 2r principal submatrices.
This answers a recent question of Grochow about complexity in polynomial ideals in the setting of border complexity. Leveraging connections between the complexity of polynomial ideals and other questions in algebraic complexity, our results provide a generic recipe that allows lower bounds for the determinant to be applied to other problems in algebraic complexity. We give several such applications, two of which are highlighted below.
We prove new lower bounds for the Ideal Proof System of Grochow and Pitassi. Specifically, we give super-polynomial lower bounds for refutations computed by low-depth circuits. This extends the recent breakthrough low-depth circuit lower bounds of Limaye et al. to the setting of proof complexity. Moreover, we show that for many natural circuit classes, the approximative proof complexity of our hard instance is governed by the approximative circuit complexity of the determinant.
We also construct new hitting set generators for the closure of low-depth circuits. For any ε > 0, we construct generators with seed length O(nε) that hit n-variate low-depth circuits. Our generators attain a near-optimal tradeoff between their seed length and degree, and are computable by low-depth circuits of near-linear size (with respect to the size of their output). This matches the seed length of the generators recently obtained by Limaye et al., but improves on the degree and circuit complexity of the generator.

References

[1]
Manindra Agrawal, Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, and Nitin Saxena. 2015. Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear Circuits. SIAM J. Comput., 44, 3 (2015), 669–697. https://doi.org/10.1137/140975103
[2]
Yaroslav Alekseev. 2021. A Lower Bound for Polynomial Calculus with Extension Rule. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021), Valentine Kabanets (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 200). Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 21:1–21:18. isbn:978-3-95977-193-1 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.21
[3]
Yaroslav Alekseev, Dima Grigoriev, Edward A. Hirsch, and Iddo Tzameret. 2020. Semi-Algebraic Proofs, IPS Lower Bounds, and the τ -Conjecture: Can a Natural Number Be Negative? In 2020. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 54–67. isbn:9781450369794 https://doi.org/10.1145/3357713.3384245
[4]
Matthew Anderson, Michael A. Forbes, Ramprasad Saptharishi, Amir Shpilka, and Ben Lee Volk. 2018. Identity Testing and Lower Bounds for Read-k Oblivious Algebraic Branching Programs. ACM Trans. Comput. Theory, 10, 1 (2018), Article 3, 30 pages. issn:1942-3454 https://doi.org/10.1145/3170709
[5]
Matthew Anderson, Dieter van Melkebeek, and Ilya Volkovich. 2015. Deterministic polynomial identity tests for multilinear bounded-read formulae. Computational Complexity, 24 (2015), 695–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-015-0097-4
[6]
Robert Andrews. 2020. Algebraic Hardness Versus Randomness in Low Characteristic. In 35th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2020), Shubhangi Saraf (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 169). Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 37:1–37:32. isbn:978-3-95977-156-6 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2020.37
[7]
Paul Beame, Russell Impagliazzo, Jan Krajíček, Toniann Pitassi, and Pavel Pudlák. 1996. Lower bounds on Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz and propositional proofs. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 73, 3 (1996), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1112/plms/s3-73.1.1 1994
[8]
Vishwas Bhargava, Shubhangi Saraf, and Ilya Volkovich. 2020. Deterministic Factorization of Sparse Polynomials with Bounded Individual Degree. J. ACM, 67, 2 (2020), 8:1–8:28. issn:0004-5411 https://doi.org/10.1145/3365667 2018
[9]
Dario Bini, Milvio Capovani, Francesco Romani, and Grazia Lotti. 1979. O(n^2.7799) complexity for n × n approximate matrix multiplication. Inform. Process. Lett., 8, 5 (1979), 234–235. issn:0020-0190 https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(79)90113-3
[10]
Pranav Bisht and Nitin Saxena. 2021. Blackbox identity testing for sum of speacial ROABPs and its border class. Computational Complexity, 30, 8 (2021), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-021-00209-y
[11]
Markus Bläser, Julian Dörfler, and Christian Ikenmeyer. 2021. On the Complexity of Evaluating Highest Weight Vectors. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021), Valentine Kabanets (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 200). Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 29:1–29:36. isbn:978-3-95977-193-1 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.29
[12]
Peter Bürgisser. 2000. Completeness and Reduction in Algebraic Complexity Theory. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04179-6
[13]
Peter Bürgisser. 2004. The complexity of factors of multivariate polynomials. Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 4, 4 (2004), 369–396. issn:1615-3375 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-002-0059-5
[14]
Peter Bürgisser, Michael Clausen, and M. Amin Shokrollahi. 1997. Algebraic complexity theory (Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], Vol. 315). Springer-Verlag, Berlin. isbn:3-540-60582-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03338-8 With the collaboration of Thomas Lickteig
[15]
Sam Buss, Russell Impagliazzo, Jan Krajíček, Pavel Pudlák, Alexander A. Razborov, and Jiři Sgall. 1996. Proof complexity in algebraic systems and bounded depth Frege systems with modular counting. Computational Complexity, 6 (1996), 256–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01294258
[16]
Chi-Ning Chou, Mrinal Kumar, and Noam Solomon. 2019. Closure of VP under taking factors: a short and simple proof. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1903.02366 arXiv:1903.02366.
[17]
Chi-Ning Chou, Mrinal Kumar, and Noam Solomon. 2019. Closure Results for Polynomial Factorization. Theory of Computing, 15, 13 (2019), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2019.v015a013 2018
[18]
Matthew Clegg, Jeffery Edmonds, and Russell Impagliazzo. 1996. Using the Groebner Basis Algorithm to Find Proofs of Unsatisfiability. In 1996. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 174–183. isbn:0897917855 https://doi.org/10.1145/237814.237860
[19]
David A. Cox, John Little, and Donal O’Shea. 2015. Ideals, varieties, and algorithms - an introduction to computational algebraic geometry and commutative algebra (4 ed.). Springer. isbn:978-3-319-16720-6
[20]
Corrado de Concini, David Eisenbud, and Claudio Procesi. 1980. Young diagrams and determinantal varieties. Invent. Math., 56, 2 (1980), 129–165. issn:0020-9910 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01392548
[21]
Jacques Désarménien, Joseph P. S. Kung, and Gian-Carlo Rota. 1978. Invariant theory, Young bitableaux, and combinatorics. Advances in Math., 27, 1 (1978), 63–92. issn:0001-8708 https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8708(78)90077-4
[22]
Peter Doubilet, Gian-Carlo Rota, and Joel Stein. 1974. On the foundations of combinatorial theory. IX. Combinatorial methods in invariant theory. Studies in Applied Mathematics, 53 (1974), 185–216. issn:0022-2526 https://doi.org/10.1002/sapm1974533185
[23]
Pranjal Dutta, Prateek Dwivedi, and Nitin Saxena. 2021. Demystifying the border of depth-3 algebraic circuits. In 2021. 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS52979.2021.00018
[24]
Pranjal Dutta, Prateek Dwivedi, and Nitin Saxena. 2021. Deterministic Identity Testing Paradigms for Bounded Top-Fanin Depth-4 Circuits. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021), Valentine Kabanets (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 200). Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 11:1–11:27. isbn:978-3-95977-193-1 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.11
[25]
Pranjal Dutta, Nitin Saxena, and Amit Sinhababu. 2018. Discovering the roots: uniform closure results for algebraic classes under factoring. In 2018. 1152–1165. https://doi.org/10.1145/3188745.3188760
[26]
Zeev Dvir and Amir Shpilka. 2007. Locally decodable codes with two queries and polynomial identity testing for depth 3 circuits. SIAM J. Comput., 36, 5 (2007), 1404–1434. issn:0097-5397 https://doi.org/10.1137/05063605X
[27]
Zeev Dvir, Amir Shpilka, and Amir Yehudayoff. 2009. Hardness-Randomness Tradeoffs for Bounded Depth Arithmetic Circuits. SIAM J. Comput., 39, 4 (2009), 1279–1293. https://doi.org/10.1137/080735850
[28]
Michael A. Forbes. 2016. Some concrete questions on the border complexity of polynomials. Talk presented at the Workshop on Algebraic Complexity Theory (WACT), Tel Aviv
[29]
Michael A. Forbes, Ramprasad Saptharishi, and Amir Shpilka. 2014. Hitting sets for multilinear read-once algebraic branching programs, in any order. In 2014. 867–875. https://doi.org/10.1145/2591796.2591816
[30]
Michael A. Forbes and Amir Shpilka. 2013. Quasipolynomial-Time Identity Testing of Non-commutative and Read-Once Oblivious Algebraic Branching Programs. In 2013. 243–252. https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2013.34
[31]
Michael A. Forbes and Amir Shpilka. 2018. A PSPACE Construction of a Hitting Set for the Closure of Small Algebraic Circuits. In 2018. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 1180–1192. isbn:9781450355599 https://doi.org/10.1145/3188745.3188792
[32]
Michael A. Forbes, Amir Shpilka, Iddo Tzameret, and Avi Wigderson. 2016. Proof Complexity Lower Bounds from Algebraic Circuit Complexity. In 2016. 32:1–32:17. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2016.32
[33]
Joshua A. Grochow. 2020. Complexity in ideals of polynomials: questions on algebraic complexity of circuits and proofs. Bull. EATCS.
[34]
Joshua A. Grochow and Toniann Pitassi. 2018. Circuit Complexity, Proof Complexity, and Polynomial Identity Testing: The Ideal Proof System. J. ACM, 65, 6 (2018), Article 37, Nov., 37:1–37:59 pages. issn:0004-5411 https://doi.org/10.1145/3230742
[35]
Zeyu Guo and Rohit Gurjar. 2020. Improved Explicit Hitting-Sets for ROABPs. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2020), Jarosł aw Byrka and Raghu Meka (Eds.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 176). Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 4:1–4:16. isbn:978-3-95977-164-1 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2020.4
[36]
Zeyu Guo, Nitin Saxena, and Amit Sinhababu. 2019. Algebraic Dependencies and PSPACE Algorithms in Approximative Complexity over Any Field. Theory of Computing, 15, 16 (2019), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2019.v015a016
[37]
Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, and Nitin Saxena. 2017. Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Any-Order, Read-Once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs. Theory of Computing, 13, 1 (2017), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2017.v013a002
[38]
Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Nitin Saxena, and Thomas Thierauf. 2017. Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-Once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs. Computational Complexity, 26, 4 (2017), 835–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-016-0141-z
[39]
Russell Impagliazzo, Sasank Mouli, and Toniann Pitassi. 2020. The Surprising Power of Constant Depth Algebraic Proofs. In Proceedings of the Thirty fifth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 2020). IEEE Computer Society Press, 591–603. https://doi.org/10.1145/3373718.3394754
[40]
Russell Impagliazzo, Pavel Pudlák, and Jiří Sgall. 1999. Lower bounds for the polynomial calculus and the Gröbner basis algorithm. Computational Complexity, 8 (1999), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s000370050024
[41]
Valentine Kabanets and Russell Impagliazzo. 2004. Derandomizing Polynomial Identity Tests Means Proving Circuit Lower Bounds. Computational Complexity, 13, 1-2 (2004), 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-004-0182-6
[42]
Erich Kaltofen. 1987. Single-Factor Hensel Lifting and its Application to the Straight-Line Complexity of Certain Polynomials. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1987, New York, New York, USA. 443–452. https://doi.org/10.1145/28395.28443
[43]
Zohar S. Karnin, Partha Mukhopadhyay, Amir Shpilka, and Ilya Volkovich. 2013. Deterministic Identity Testing of Depth-4 Multilinear Circuits with Bounded Top Fan-in. SIAM J. Comput., 42, 6 (2013), 2114–2131. https://doi.org/10.1137/110824516
[44]
Zohar S. Karnin and Amir Shpilka. 2011. Black box polynomial identity testing of generalized depth-3 arithmetic circuits with bounded top fan-in. Combinatorica, 31, 3 (2011), 333–364. issn:0209-9683 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00493-011-2537-3
[45]
Neeraj Kayal and Shubhangi Saraf. 2009. Blackbox polynomial identity testing for depth 3 circuits. In 2009. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos, CA, 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2009.67
[46]
Neeraj Kayal and Nitin Saxena. 2007. Polynomial identity testing for depth 3 circuits. Comput. Complexity, 16, 2 (2007), 115–138. issn:1016-3328 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-007-0226-9
[47]
Adam R. Klivans and Daniel Spielman. 2001. Randomness Efficient Identity Testing of Multivariate Polynomials. In 2001. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 216–223. isbn:1581133499 https://doi.org/10.1145/380752.380801
[48]
Swastik Kopparty, Shubhangi Saraf, and Amir Shpilka. 2015. Equivalence of Polynomial Identity Testing and Polynomial Factorization. Computational Complexity, 24, 2 (2015), 295–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-015-0102-y
[49]
Jan Krajíček. 2019. Proof Complexity. Cambridge University Press. isbn:9781108416849
[50]
Nutan Limaye, Srikanth Srinivasan, and Sébastien Tavenas. 2021. Superpolynomial Lower Bounds Against Low-Depth Algebraic Circuits. In 2021. 804–814. https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS52979.2021.00083
[51]
Meena Mahajan and V. Vinay. 1997. Determinant: Combinatorics, Algorithms, and Complexity. Chicago Journal of Theoretical Computer Science, 1997, 5 (1997), https://doi.org/10.4086/cjtcs.1997.005
[52]
Dori Medini and Amir Shpilka. 2021. Hitting Sets and Reconstruction for Dense Orbits in VP_e and Σ Π Σ Circuits. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021), Valentine Kabanets (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 200). Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 19:1–19:27. isbn:978-3-95977-193-1 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.19
[53]
Daniel Minahan and Ilya Volkovich. 2018. Complete Derandomization of Identity Testing and Reconstruction of Read-Once Formulas. ACM Trans. Comput. Theory, 10, 3 (2018), Article 10, 11 pages. issn:1942-3454 https://doi.org/10.1145/3196836
[54]
Ketan Mulmuley and Milind A. Sohoni. 2001. Geometric Complexity Theory I: An Approach to the P vs. NP and Related Problems. SIAM J. Comput., 31, 2 (2001), 496–526. https://doi.org/10.1137/S009753970038715X
[55]
Rafael Oliveira. 2016. Factors of low individual degree polynomials. Computational Complexity, 25, 2 (2016), 507–561. issn:1016-3328 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-016-0130-2
[56]
Rafael Oliveira, Amir Shpilka, and Ben Lee Volk. 2016. Subexponential Size Hitting Sets for Bounded Depth Multilinear Formulas. Computational Complexity, 25 (2016), 455–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-016-0131-1
[57]
Shir Peleg and Amir Shpilka. 2020. A Generalized Sylvester-Gallai Type Theorem for Quadratic Polynomials. In 35th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2020), Shubhangi Saraf (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 169). Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 8:1–8:33. isbn:978-3-95977-156-6 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2020.8
[58]
Shir Peleg and Amir Shpilka. 2021. Polynomial Time Deterministic Identity Testing Algorithm for Σ [3] Π Σ Π [2] Circuits via Edelstein–Kelly Type Theorem for Quadratic Polynomials. In 2021. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 259–271. isbn:9781450380539 https://doi.org/10.1145/3406325.3451013
[59]
Toniann Pitassi and Iddo Tzameret. 2016. Algebraic Proof Complexity: Progress, Frontiers and Challenges. ACM SIGLOG News, 3, 3 (2016), Aug., 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984450.2984455
[60]
Alexander A. Razborov. 1998. Lower bounds for the polynomial calculus. Computational Complexity, 7 (1998), 291–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s000370050013
[61]
Chandan Saha and Bhargav Thankey. 2021. Hitting Sets for Orbits of Circuit Classes and Polynomial Families. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2021), Mary Wootters and Laura Sanità (Eds.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 207). Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 50:1–50:26. isbn:978-3-95977-207-5 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2021.50
[62]
Rahul Santhanam and Iddo Tzameret. 2021. Iterated Lower Bound Formulas: A Diagonalization-Based Approach to Proof Complexity. In 2021. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 234–247. isbn:9781450380539 https://doi.org/10.1145/3406325.3451010
[63]
Ramprasad Saptharishi. 2019. A survey of lower bounds in arithmetic circuit complexity. https://github.com/dasarpmar/lowerbounds-survey
[64]
Shubhangi Saraf and Ilya Volkovich. 2018. Black-Box Identity Testing of Depth-4 Multilinear Circuits. Combinatorica, 38 (2018), 1205–1238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00493-016-3460-4
[65]
Nitin Saxena and C. Seshadhri. 2011. An almost optimal rank bound for depth-3 identities. SIAM J. Comput., 40, 1 (2011), 200–224. issn:0097-5397 https://doi.org/10.1137/090770679
[66]
Nitin Saxena and C. Seshadhri. 2012. Blackbox identity testing for bounded top-fanin depth-3 circuits: the field doesn’t matter. SIAM J. Comput., 41, 5 (2012), 1285–1298. issn:0097-5397 https://doi.org/10.1137/10848232
[67]
Nitin Saxena and C. Seshadhri. 2013. From Sylvester-Gallai configurations to rank bounds: improved blackbox identity test for depth-3 circuits. J. ACM, 60, 5 (2013), 33:1–33:33. issn:0004-5411 https://doi.org/10.1145/2528403
[68]
Jacob T. Schwartz. 1980. Fast Probabilistic Algorithms for Verification of Polynomial Identities. J. ACM, 27, 4 (1980), 701–717. https://doi.org/10.1145/322217.322225
[69]
Amir Shpilka. 2019. Sylvester-Gallai Type Theorems for Quadratic Polynomials. In 2019. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 1203–1214. isbn:9781450367059 https://doi.org/10.1145/3313276.3316341
[70]
Amir Shpilka and Ilya Volkovich. 2015. Read-once polynomial identity testing. Computational Complexity, 27 (2015), 477–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-015-0105-8
[71]
Amir Shpilka and Amir Yehudayoff. 2010. Arithmetic Circuits: A survey of recent results and open questions. Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, 5, 3-4 (2010), 207–388. https://doi.org/10.1561/0400000039
[72]
Amit Sinhababu and Thomas Thierauf. 2020. Factorization of Polynomials Given By Arithmetic Branching Programs. In 2020, Shubhangi Saraf (Ed.) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 169). Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany. 33:1–33:19. isbn:978-3-95977-156-6 issn:1868-8969 https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2020.33
[73]
Leslie G. Valiant. 1979. Completeness Classes in Algebra. In 1979. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 249–261. isbn:9781450374385 https://doi.org/10.1145/800135.804419
[74]
Finn Wiersig. 2020. Sparse Polynomials in Polynomial Ideals.
[75]
Richard Zippel. 1979. Probabilistic algorithms for sparse polynomials. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, EUROSAM 1979. 216–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09519-5_73

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
STOC 2022: Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing
June 2022
1698 pages
ISBN:9781450392648
DOI:10.1145/3519935
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 10 June 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Determinantal ideals
  2. Ideal Proof System
  3. polynomial identity testing
  4. straightening law

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

STOC '22
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,469 of 4,586 submissions, 32%

Upcoming Conference

STOC '25
57th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2025)
June 23 - 27, 2025
Prague , Czech Republic

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)26
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 31 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media