Lecture 9 - Depth Reduction II

In the previous lecture, we saw Brent’s formula balancing technique, as well as Hyafil’s circuit balancing technique, which were used to reduce the depth of a circuit. While Brent’s technique reduced the depth of a formula while preserving the size of the formula (up to a constant factor), Hyafil’s technique reduced the depth of a circuit while incurring a quasi-polynomial blow-up in the size of the circuit.

In this lecture, we will see a different technique for depth reduction, which is due to Valiant, Skyum, Berkowitz, and Rackoff. They show that any arithmetic circuit of size s computing a polynomial of degree d can be converted into an arithmetic circuit of depth O((logs+logd)logd) and size poly(s,d) that computes the same polynomial.

Before we state the theorem, recall that Hyafil’s technique seemed a bit coarse, as it didn’t take much into account the structure of the circuit. In particular, the technique didn’t take much into account the relations between intermediate computations in the circuit (the depth reduction had a “large gap” in degree).

We have seen in Baur-Strassen how to take derivatives with respect to a gate in a circuit. Let us recall that definition.


Definition 1 (Partial derivative with respect to a gate): Let Φ(x) be an algebraic circuit and u,v be two gates in Φ, computing polynomials fu,fv respectively. Let Φu=y denote the circuit obtained by deleting the incoming edges to u and replacing the output of u by the variable y. Let fv,u(x,y) be the polynomial computed by v in the circuit Φu=y. Now, define the partial derivative of v with respect to u as the polynomial ufv:=(yfv,u)|y=fu.


Now, we have the following properties of such gate derivatives, which are simply derived from the basic rules of differentiation.


Proposition 1 (properties of gate derivatives): Let Φ be a homogeneous algebraic circuit computing a polynomial f, and let u,v be two gates in Φ. Then, the following properties hold:

  1. Either ufv=0 or deg(ufv)=deg(fv)deg(fu).
  2. If v is a sum gate, with children v1,v2, then ufv=ufv1+ufv2.
  3. If v is a product gate, with children v1,v2, such that deg(fv1)deg(fv2). If deg(fu)>deg(fv)/2, then ufv=fv2ufv1.

Now that we have the notion of gate derivatives, we can refine our depth reduction. We will now define the notion of a frontier of a circuit.


Definition 2 (Frontier of a circuit): For an integer r0, the r-th frontier of a circuit Φ, denoted by Fr(Φ), is the set of all multiplication gates in Φ that compute a polynomial of degree larger than r, and whose children compute polynomials of degree less than or equal to r. That is Fr(Φ):={vΦfv=fv1fv2,deg(fv)>r,deg(fv1),deg(fv2)r}.


With the above definition, we can get a refined decomposition of the circuit into layers, where each layer is a frontier of the circuit.

The following proposition shows the usefulness of the frontiers.


Proposition 2 (Frontier decomposition): Let Φ be a homogeneous algebraic circuit and r>0 be an integer. Let u,v be two gates in Φ such that deg(fu)r<deg(fv)<2deg(fu). Then, we have fv=wFr(Φ)fwwfv and ufv=wFr(Φ)ufwwfv.


Proof: Let’s prove the first equality by induction on the length of the longest path from Fr(Φ) to v. Let v1,v2 be the children of v.

Base case: vFr(Φ).

In this case, for any wFr(Φ) different from v, we have wfv=0, as w is not in Φv. Since vfv=1, we have wFr(Φ)fwwfv=fvvfv=fv.

Inductive step: we have two cases to consider.

Case 1: v is a sum gate.

In this case, we have fv=fv1+fv2, as well as deg(fv)=deg(fv1)=deg(fv2). Thus, by induction we have fv1=wFr(Φ)fwwfv1 and fv2=wFr(Φ)fwwfv2. Hence, we have fv=fv1+fv2=wFr(Φ)fw(wfv1+wfv2)=wFr(Φ)fwwfv. where we have used Proposition 1 Part 2 in the last equality.

Case 2: v is a product gate.

Assume w.l.o.g. that deg(fv1)deg(fv2). Since vFr(Φ), we have r<deg(fv1)<2r. By induction, we have fv1=wFr(Φ)fwwfv1. For all wFr(Φ), we have deg(fv)<2r<2deg(fw). Thus, by Proposition 1 Part 3, we have wfv=fv2wfv1. Hence, we have fv=fv1fv2=wFr(Φ)fwfv2wfv1=wFr(Φ)fwwfv.

The proof of the second equality is similar to the first one.


The point of the above proposition is to show that we can use the frontier to compute all the gates with degree between r and 2r in the circuit. We are now ready to state and prove the Valiant-Skyum-Berkowitz-Rackoff theorem.

Valiant-Skyum-Berkowitz-Rackoff (VSBR) Theorem


Theorem 1 (Valiant-Skyum-Berkowitz-Rackoff): For any arithmetic circuit Φ of size s computing a polynomial f of degree d, there is an arithmetic circuit Ψ of depth O(log(s)log(d)) and size poly(s,d) that computes f.


The theorem above will follow if we prove the following version:


Theorem (variant of theorem 1): For any homogeneous arithmetic circuit Φ of size s computing a polynomial f of degree d, there is a homogeneous arithmetic circuit Ψ computing f having the following properties:

  1. Ψ has alternating layers of addition and multiplication gates.
  2. Each multiplication gate v computes a product of at most 5 forms, each with degree at most deg(v)/2.
  3. Sum gates have arbitrary fan-in.
  4. The size of Ψ is poly(s,d).

In particular, the above properties imply that the depth of Ψ is O(logd).


Proof: Note that we can assume w.l.o.g. that sn, as a circuit of size <n cannot use all the variables. We will construct the circuit Ψ iteratively, where in iteration k we will do the following:

  1. compute all the forms fv from Φ such that 2k1<deg(fv)2k.
  2. compute all the forms ufv for all u,v such that 2k1<deg(fv)deg(fu)2k, and deg(fv)<2deg(fu).

Base case: In iteration k=0, we compute all the forms fv such that deg(fv)20=1. As these are just linear forms in the input variables, we can compute each of them by an addition gate with fanin s and depth 1. Also, for every two gates u,v such that deg(fv)deg(fu)1, Proposition 1 Part 1 implies that ufv=0 or deg(ufv)=deg(fv)deg(fu)1. Hence, we can compute all the forms ufv by addition gates with fanin s and depth 1.

Inductive step: Assume that we have completed iteration k. Let us compute iteration k+1. Let v be a gate in Φ such that 2k<deg(fv)2k+1 and let the frontier parameter be r=deg(fv)/2. By Proposition 2, we have fv=wFr(Φ)fwwfv=wFr(Φ)fw1fw2wfv. where fw=fw1fw2 (since wFr(Φ) it must be a multiplication gate). As wFr(Φ), we have r<deg(fw)2r and deg(fw1),deg(fw2)r. Thus, by the inductive hypothesis, we have already computed fw1,fw2. Similarly, we have that deg(wfv)deg(fv)deg(fw)<r. Thus, we have already computed wfv. Hence, we can compute fv by an addition gate with fanin 2s whose children are product gates of 3 forms each, each of degree at most r.

Now, let us compute the derivatives ufv such that 2k<deg(fv)deg(fu)2k+1 and deg(fv)<2deg(fu). Let the frontier parameter be r=deg(fv)+deg(fu)2. By Proposition 2, we have ufv=wFr(Φ)ufwwfv. As wFr(Φ) and we can assume wfv0, we have r<deg(fw)mindeg(fv),2r and rdeg(fw1)deg(fw2). Moreover, we have 2deg(fu)>deg(fv)r. Hence, by Proposition 1 Part 3, we have ufw=fw2ufw1. By Proposition 1 Part 1, we have deg(wfv)=deg(fv)deg(fw)deg(fv)deg(fu)22k. Similarly, we have deg(ufw1)deg(fw1)deg(fu)deg(fv)deg(fu)22k. Thus, by the inductive hypothesis, we have already computed wfv and ufw1.

The only problem now is that we need to compute fw2, and by the above we can only upper bound its degree by deg(fv)deg(fu). In this case, we simply expand fw2 as in Proposition 2, and we have ufv=wFr(Φ)fw2ufw1wfv=wFr(Φ)(zFm(Φ)fz1fz2zfw2)ufw1wfv. where m=deg(fv)deg(fu)22k. Thus, by the inductive hypothesis, we have also computed fz1,fz2 and zfw2.

Now, all the terms in the multiplication have degree at most m, and we have at most 5 terms in each product. This computation can be done by an addition gate with fanin 4s2 whose inputs are product gates of 5 forms each, each of degree at most m.

This concludes the theorem.


References

The material of this lecture is based on the following sources:

  • Chapter 2 of [SY].
  • Chapter 5 of [R]
Previous
Next