SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Spencer Peters

Publications and source records attributed to Spencer Peters.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Qualitative Mechanism Independence

We define what it means for a joint probability distribution to be compatible with a set of independent causal mechanisms, at a qualitative level -- or, more precisely, with a directed hypergraph ${\mathcal{A}}$, which is the qualitative structure of a probabilistic dependency graph (PDG). When ${\mathcal{A}}$ represents a qualitative Bayesian network, QIM-compatibility with ${\mathcal{A}}$ reduces to satisfying the appropriate conditional independencies. But giving semantics to hypergraphs using QIM-compatibility lets us do much more. For one thing, we can capture functional dependencies. For another, we can capture important aspects of causality using compatibility: we can use compatibility to understand cyclic causal graphs, and to demonstrate structural compatibility, we must essentially produce a causal model. Finally, QIM-compatibility has deep connections to information theory. Applying our notion to cyclic structures helps to clarify a longstanding conceptual issue in information theory.

cs.IT

Recursive lattice reduction -- A framework for finding short lattice vectors

We propose a recursive lattice reduction framework for finding short non-zero vectors or dense sublattices of a lattice. The framework works by recursively searching for dense sublattices of dense sublattices (or their duals) with progressively lower rank. When the procedure encounters a recursive call on a lattice $L$ with relatively low rank, we simply use a known algorithm to find a shortest non-zero vector in $L$. This new framework is complementary to basis reduction algorithms, which similarly work to reduce an $n$-dimensional lattice problem with some approximation factor $\gamma$ to a lower-dimensional exact lattice problem in some lower dimension $k$, with a tradeoff between $\gamma$, $n$, and $k$. Our framework provides an alternative and arguably simpler perspective. For example, our algorithms can be described at a high level without explicitly referencing any specific basis of the lattice, the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization, or even projection (though, of course, concrete implementations of algorithms in this framework will likely make use of such things). We present a number of instantiations of our framework. Our main concrete result is an efficient reduction that matches the tradeoff achieved by the best-known basis reduction algorithms. This reduction also can be used to find dense sublattices with any rank $\ell$ satisfying $\min\{\ell,n-\ell\} \leq n-k+1$, using only an oracle for SVP in $k$ dimensions, with slightly better parameters than what was known using basis reduction. We also show a simple reduction with the same tradeoff for finding short vectors in quasipolynomial time, and a reduction from finding dense sublattices of a high-dimensional lattice to this problem in lower dimension. Finally, we present an automated search procedure that finds algorithms in this framework that (provably) achieve better approximations with fewer oracle calls.

cs.DS

Lattice Problems Beyond Polynomial Time

We study the complexity of lattice problems in a world where algorithms, reductions, and protocols can run in superpolynomial time, revisiting four foundational results: two worst-case to average-case reductions and two protocols. We also show a novel protocol. 1. We prove that secret-key cryptography exists if $\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{n})$-approximate SVP is hard for $2^{\varepsilon n}$-time algorithms. I.e., we extend to our setting (Micciancio and Regev's improved version of) Ajtai's celebrated polynomial-time worst-case to average-case reduction from $\widetilde{O}(n)$-approximate SVP to SIS. 2. We prove that public-key cryptography exists if $\widetilde{O}(n)$-approximate SVP is hard for $2^{\varepsilon n}$-time algorithms. This extends to our setting Regev's celebrated polynomial-time worst-case to average-case reduction from $\widetilde{O}(n^{1.5})$-approximate SVP to LWE. In fact, Regev's reduction is quantum, but ours is classical, generalizing Peikert's polynomial-time classical reduction from $\widetilde{O}(n^2)$-approximate SVP. 3. We show a $2^{\varepsilon n}$-time coAM protocol for $O(1)$-approximate CVP, generalizing the celebrated polynomial-time protocol for $O(\sqrt{n/\log n})$-CVP due to Goldreich and Goldwasser. These results show complexity-theoretic barriers to extending the recent line of fine-grained hardness results for CVP and SVP to larger approximation factors. (This result also extends to arbitrary norms.) 4. We show a $2^{\varepsilon n}$-time co-non-deterministic protocol for $O(\sqrt{\log n})$-approximate SVP, generalizing the (also celebrated!) polynomial-time protocol for $O(\sqrt{n})$-CVP due to Aharonov and Regev. 5. We give a novel coMA protocol for $O(1)$-approximate CVP with a $2^{\varepsilon n}$-time verifier. All of the results described above are special cases of more general theorems that achieve time-approximation factor tradeoffs.

cs.CC

Reasoning About Causal Models With Infinitely Many Variables

Generalized structural equations models (GSEMs) [Peters and Halpern 2021], are, as the name suggests, a generalization of structural equations models (SEMs). They can deal with (among other things) infinitely many variables with infinite ranges, which is critical for capturing dynamical systems. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of causal reasoning in GSEMs that is an extension of the sound and complete axiomatization provided by Halpern [2000] for SEMs. Considering GSEMs helps clarify what properties Halpern's axioms capture.

cs.AI

Causal Modeling With Infinitely Many Variables

Structural-equations models (SEMs) are perhaps the most commonly used framework for modeling causality. However, as we show, naively extending this framework to infinitely many variables, which is necessary, for example, to model dynamical systems, runs into several problems. We introduce GSEMs (generalized SEMs), a flexible generalization of SEMs that directly specify the results of interventions, in which (1) systems of differential equations can be represented in a natural and intuitive manner, (2) certain natural situations, which cannot be represented by SEMs at all, can be represented easily, (3) the definition of actual causality in SEMs carries over essentially without change.

cs.AI