David Purser

CC
3papers
11citations
Novelty57%
AI Score43

3 Papers

87.3LOMay 11
On the $p$-adic Skolem Problem

Piotr Bacik, Joël Ouaknine, David Purser et al.

The Skolem Problem asks to determine whether a given linear recurrence sequence (LRS) has a zero term. Showing decidability of this problem is equivalent to giving an effective proof of the Skolem-Mahler-Lech Theorem, which asserts that a non-degenerate LRS has finitely many zeros. The latter result was proven over 90 years ago via an ineffective method showing that such an LRS has only finitely many $p$-adic zeros. In this paper we consider the problem of determining whether a given LRS has a $p$-adic zero, as well as the corresponding function problem of computing exact representations of all $p$-adic zeros. We present algorithms for both problems and report on their implementation. The output of the algorithms is unconditionally correct, and termination is guaranteed subject to the $p$-adic Schanuel Conjecture (a standard number-theoretic hypothesis concerning the $p$-adic exponential function). While these algorithms do not solve the Skolem Problem, they can be exploited to find natural-number and rational zeros under additional hypotheses. To illustrate this, we apply our results to show decidability of the Simultaneous Skolem Problem (determine whether two coprime linear recurrences have a common natural-number zero), again subject to the $p$-adic Schanuel Conjecture.

90.4FLMar 31
Resolving Nondeterminism by Chance

Soumyajit Paul, David Purser, Sven Schewe et al.

History-deterministic automata are those in which nondeterministic choices can be correctly resolved stepwise: there is a strategy to select a continuation of a run given the next input letter so that if the overall input word admits some accepting run, then the constructed run is also accepting. Motivated by checking qualitative properties in probabilistic verification, we consider the setting where the resolver strategy can randomize and only needs to succeed with lower-bounded probability. We study the expressiveness of such stochastically-resolvable automata as well as consider the decision questions of whether a given automaton has this property. In particular, we show that it is undecidable to check if a given NFA is $λ$-stochastically resolvable. This problem is decidable for finitely-ambiguous automata. We also present complexity upper and lower bounds for several well-studied classes of automata for which this problem remains decidable.

CCNov 8, 2019
The Complexity of Verifying Loop-Free Programs as Differentially Private

Marco Gaboardi, Kobbi Nissim, David Purser

We study the problem of verifying differential privacy for loop-free programs with probabilistic choice. Programs in this class can be seen as randomized Boolean circuits, which we will use as a formal model to answer two different questions: first, deciding whether a program satisfies a prescribed level of privacy; second, approximating the privacy parameters a program realizes. We show that the problem of deciding whether a program satisfies $\varepsilon$-differential privacy is $coNP^{\#P}$-complete. In fact, this is the case when either the input domain or the output range of the program is large. Further, we show that deciding whether a program is $(\varepsilon,δ)$-differentially private is $coNP^{\#P}$-hard, and in $coNP^{\#P}$ for small output domains, but always in $coNP^{\#P^{\#P}}$. Finally, we show that the problem of approximating the level of differential privacy is both $NP$-hard and $coNP$-hard. These results complement previous results by Murtagh and Vadhan showing that deciding the optimal composition of differentially private components is $\#P$-complete, and that approximating the optimal composition of differentially private components is in $P$.