Biblio

Ramsey theory assures us that in any graph there is a clique or independent set of a certain size, roughly logarithmic in the graph size. But how difficult is it to find the clique or independent set? If the graph is given explicitly, then it is possible to do so while examining a linear number of edges. If the graph is given by a black-box, where to figure out whether a certain edge exists the box should be queried, then a large number of queries must be issued. But what if one is given a program or circuit for computing the existence of an edge? This problem was raised by Buss and Goldberg and Papadimitriou in the context of TFNP, search problems with a guaranteed solution. We examine the relationship between black-box complexity and white-box complexity for search problems with guaranteed solution such as the above Ramsey problem. We show that under the assumption that collision resistant hash function exist (which follows from the hardness of problems such as factoring, discrete-log and learning with errors) the white-box Ramsey problem is hard and this is true even if one is looking for a much smaller clique or independent set than the theorem guarantees. In general, one cannot hope to translate all black-box hardness for TFNP into white-box hardness: we show this by adapting results concerning the random oracle methodology and the impossibility of instantiating it. Another model we consider is the succinct black-box, where there is a known upper bound on the size of the black-box (but no limit on the computation time). In this case we show that for all TFNP problems there is an upper bound on the number of queries proportional to the description size of the box times the solution size. On the other hand, for promise problems this is not the case. Finally, we consider the complexity of graph property testing in the white-box model. We show a property which is hard to test even when one is given the program for computing the graph. The hard property is whether the graph is a two-source extractor.

One important goal of black-box complexity theory is the development of complexity models allowing to derive meaningful lower bounds for whole classes of randomized search heuristics. Complementing classical runtime analysis, black-box models help us understand how algorithmic choices such as the population size, the variation operators, or the selection rules influence the optimization time. One example for such a result is the Ω(n log n) lower bound for unary unbiased algorithms on functions with a unique global optimum [Lehre/Witt, GECCO 2010], which tells us that higher arity operators or biased sampling strategies are needed when trying to beat this bound. In lack of analyzing techniques, almost no non-trivial bounds are known for other restricted models. Proving such bounds therefore remains to be one of the main challenges in black-box complexity theory. With this paper we contribute to our technical toolbox for lower bound computations by proposing a new type of information-theoretic argument. We regard the permutation- and bit-invariant version of LeadingOnes and prove that its (1+1) elitist black-box complexity is Ω(n2), a bound that is matched by (1+1)-type evolutionary algorithms. The (1+1) elitist complexity of LeadingOnes is thus considerably larger than its unrestricted one, which is known to be of order n log log n [Afshani et al., 2013].

In classical runtime analysis it has been observed that certain working principles of an evolutionary algorithm cannot be understood by only looking at the asymptotic order of the runtime, but that more precise estimates are needed. In this work we demonstrate that the same observation applies to black-box complexity analysis. We prove that the unary unbiased black-box complexity of the classic OneMax function class is n ln(n) – cn ± o(n) for a constant c between 0.2539 and 0.2665. Our analysis yields a simple (1+1)-type algorithm achieving this runtime bound via a fitness-dependent mutation strength. When translated into a fixed-budget perspective, our algorithm with the same budget computes a solution that asymptotically is 13% closer to the optimum (given that the budget is at least 0.2675n).

Finding and proving lower bounds on black-box complexities is one of the hardest problems in theory of randomized search heuristics. Until recently, there were no general ways of doing this, except for information theoretic arguments similar to the one of Droste, Jansen and Wegener. In a recent paper by Buzdalov, Kever and Doerr, a theorem is proven which may yield tighter bounds on unrestricted black-box complexity using certain problem-specific information. To use this theorem, one should split the search process into a finite number of states, describe transitions between states, and for each state specify (and prove) the maximum number of different answers to any query. We augment these state constraints by one more kind of constraints on states, namely, the maximum number of different currently possible optima. An algorithm is presented for computing the lower bounds based on these constraints. We also empirically show improved lower bounds on black-box complexity of OneMax and Mastermind.