hardness
An Optimized Franz-Parisi Criterion and its Equivalence with SQLower Bounds
Bandeira et al. (2022) introduced the Franz-Parisi (FP) criterion for characterizing the computational hard phases in statistical detection problems. The FP criterion, based on an annealed version of the celebrated Franz-Parisi potential from statistical physics, was shown to be equivalent to low-degree polynomial (LDP) lower bounds for Gaussian additive models, thereby connecting two distinct approaches to understanding the computational hardness in statistical inference. In this paper, we propose a refined FP criterion that aims to better capture the geometric "overlap" structure of statistical models. Our main result establishes that this optimized FP criterion is equivalent to Statistical Query (SQ) lower bounds--another foundational framework in computational complexity of statistical inference. Crucially, this equivalence holds under a mild, verifiable assumption satisfied by a broad class of statistical models, including Gaussian additive models, planted sparse models, as well as non-Gaussian component analysis (NGCA), single-index (SI) models, and convex truncation detection settings. For instance, in the case of convex truncation tasks, the assumption is equivalent with the Gaussian correlation inequality (Royen, 2014) from convex geometry. In addition to the above, our equivalence not only unifies and simplifies the derivation of several known SQ lower bounds--such as for the NGCA model (Diakonikolas et al., 2017) and the SI model (Damian et al., 2024)--but also yields new SQ lower bounds of independent interest, including for the computational gaps in mixed sparse linear regression (Arpino et al., 2023) and convex truncation (De et al., 2023).
Computational Hardness of Reinforcement Learning with Partial qฯ-Realizability
This paper investigates the computational complexity of reinforcement learning within a novel linear function approximation regime, termed partial qฯ-realizability. In this framework, the objective is to learn an ฯต-optimal policy with respect to a predefined policy set ฮ , under the assumption that all value functions corresponding to policies in ฮ are linearly realizable. This framework adopts assumptions that are weaker than those in the qฯ-realizability setting yet stronger than those in the q -realizability setup. As a result, it provides a more practical model for reinforcement learning scenarios where function approximation naturally arise. We prove that learning an ฯต-optimal policy in this newly defined setting is computationally hard. More specifically, we establish NP-hardness under a parameterized greedy policy set (i.e., argmax) and, further, show that--unless NP = RP--an exponential lower bound (exponential in feature vector dimension) holds when the policy set contains softmax policies, under the Randomized Exponential Time Hypothesis. Our hardness results mirror those obtained in the q -realizability settings, and suggest that computational difficulty persists even when the policy class ฮ is expanded beyond the optimal policy, reinforcing the unbreakable nature of the computational hardness result regarding partial qฯ-realizability under two important policy sets. To establish our negative result, our primary technical contribution is a reduction from two complexity problems, ฮด-MAX-3SAT and ฮด-MAX-3SAT(b), to instances of our problem settings: GLINEAR-ฮบ-RL (under the greedy policy set) and SLINEAR-ฮบ-RL (under the softmax policy set), respectively. Our findings indicate that positive computational results are generally unattainable in the context of partial qฯ-realizability, in sharp contrast to the qฯ-realizability setting under a generative access model.
Additive Models Explained: AComputational Complexity Approach
Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) are commonly considered interpretable within the ML community, as their structure makes the relationship between inputs and outputs relatively understandable. Therefore, it may seem natural to hypothesize that obtaining meaningful explanations for GAMs could be performed efficiently and would not be computationally infeasible. In this work, we challenge this hypothesis by analyzing the computational complexity of generating different explanations for various forms of GAMs across multiple contexts. Our analysis reveals a surprisingly diverse landscape of both positive and negative complexity outcomes. Particularly, under standard complexity assumptions such as P =NP, we establish several key findings: (i) in stark contrast to many other common ML models, the complexity of generating explanations for GAMs is heavily influenced by the structure of the input space; (ii) the complexity of explaining GAMs varies significantly with the types of component models used -- but interestingly, these differences only emerge under specific input domain settings; (iii) significant complexity distinctions appear for obtaining explanations in regression tasks versus classification tasks in GAMs; and (iv) expressing complex models like neural networks additively (e.g., as neural additive models) can make them easier to explain, though interestingly, this benefit appears only for certain explanation methods and input domains. Collectively, these results shed light on the feasibility of computing diverse explanations for GAMs, offering a rigorous theoretical picture of the conditions under which such computations are possible or provably hard.
Computational Hardness of Reinforcement Learning with Partial q {\pi} -Realizability
This paper investigates the computational complexity of reinforcement learning within a novel linear function approximation regime, termed partial $q^{\pi}$-realizability. In this framework, the objective is to learn an $\epsilon$-optimal policy with respect to a predefined policy set $\Pi$, under the assumption that all value functions corresponding to policies in $\Pi$ are linearly realizable. This framework adopts assumptions that are weaker than those in the $q^{\pi}$-realizability setting yet stronger than those in the q*-realizability setup. As a result, it provides a more practical model for reinforcement learning scenarios where function approximation naturally arise. We prove that learning an $\epsilon$-optimal policy in this newly defined setting is computationally hard. More specifically, we establish NP-hardness under a parameterized greedy policy set (i.e., argmax) and, further, show that--unless NP = RP--an exponential lower bound (exponential in feature vector dimension) holds when the policy set contains softmax policies, under the Randomized Exponential Time Hypothesis. Our hardness results mirror those obtained in the $q^*$-realizability settings, and suggest that computational difficulty persists even when the policy class $ \Pi $ is expanded beyond the optimal policy, reinforcing the unbreakable nature of the computational hardness result regarding partial $ q^{\pi} $-realizability under two important policy sets. To establish our negative result, our primary technical contribution is a reduction from two complexity problems, $\delta$-Max-3SAT and $\delta$-Max-3SAT($b$), to instances of our problem settings: GLinear-$\kappa$-RL (under the greedy policy set) and SLinear-$\kappa$-RL (under the softmax policy set), respectively. Our findings indicate that positive computational results are generally unattainable in the context of partial $ q^{\pi} $-realizability, in sharp contrast to the $ q^{\pi} $-realizability setting under a generative access model.
Bi-Objective Online Matching and Submodular Allocations
Hossein Esfandiari, Nitish Korula, Vahab Mirrokni
Online allocation problems have been widely studied due to their numerous practical applications (particularly to Internet advertising), as well as considerable theoretical interest. The main challenge in such problems is making assignment decisions in the face of uncertainty about future input; effective algorithms need to predict which constraints are most likely to bind, and learn the balance between short-term gain and the value of long-term resource availability. In many important applications, the algorithm designer is faced with multiple objectives to optimize. In particular, in online advertising it is fairly common to optimize multiple metrics, such as clicks, conversions, and impressions, as well as other metrics which may be largely uncorrelated such as'share of voice', and'buyer surplus'. While there has been considerable work on multi-objective offline optimization (when the entire input is known in advance), very little is known about the online case, particularly in the case of adversarial input. In this paper, we give the first results for bi-objective online submodular optimization, providing almost matching upper and lower bounds for allocating items to agents with two submodular value functions. We also study practically relevant special cases of this problem related to Internet advertising, and obtain improved results. All our algorithms are nearly best possible, as well as being efficient and easy to implement in practice.
Computational Complexity of Learning Neural Networks: Smoothness and Degeneracy
Understanding when neural networks can be learned efficiently is a fundamental question in learning theory. Existing hardness results suggest that assumptions on both the input distribution and the network's weights are necessary for obtaining efficient algorithms. Moreover, it was previously shown that depth-2 networks can be efficiently learned under the assumptions that the input distribution is Gaussian, and the weight matrix is non-degenerate. In this work, we study whether such assumptions may suffice for learning deeper networks and prove negative results. We show that learning depth-3 ReLU networks under the Gaussian input distribution is hard even in the smoothed-analysis framework, where a random noise is added to the network's parameters. It implies that learning depth-3 ReLU networks under the Gaussian distribution is hard even if the weight matrices are non-degenerate. Moreover, we consider depth-2networks, and show hardness of learning in the smoothed-analysis framework, where both the network parameters and the input distribution are smoothed. Our hardness results are under a wellstudied assumption on the existence of local pseudorandom generators.
in Fixed Dimension Training Neural Networks is NP-Hard
Our results settle the complexity status regarding these parameters number of dimensions and number of ReLUs if the network is assumed to compute the ReLU case, we show fixed-parameter tractability for the combined parameter four ReLUs (or two linear threshold neurons) with zero training error. Finally, in We also answer a question by Froese et al. [2022, JAIR] proving W[1]-hardness for dimensions, which excludes any polynomial-time algorithm for constant dimension. Khalife and Basu [2022, IPCO] showing that both problems are NP-hard for two eral questions are still open. We answer questions by Arora et al. [2018, ICLR] and complexity of these problems has been studied numerous times in recent years, sevsidering ReLU and linear threshold activation functions.
Learning to Think from Multiple Thinkers
Joshi, Nirmit, Magen, Roey, Srebro, Nathan, Tsilivis, Nikolaos, Vardi, Gal
We study learning with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) supervision from multiple thinkers, all of whom provide correct but possibly systematically different solutions, e.g., step-by-step solutions to math problems written by different thinkers, or step-by-step execution traces of different programs solving the same problem. We consider classes that are computationally easy to learn using CoT supervision from a single thinker, but hard to learn with only end-result supervision, i.e., without CoT (Joshi et al. 2025). We establish that, under cryptographic assumptions, learning can be hard from CoT supervision provided by two or a few different thinkers, in passive data-collection settings. On the other hand, we provide a generic computationally efficient active learning algorithm that learns with a small amount of CoT data per thinker that is completely independent of the target accuracy $\varepsilon$, a moderate number of thinkers that scales as $\log \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\log \log \frac{1}{\varepsilon}$, and sufficient passive end-result data that scales as $\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\cdot poly\log\frac{1}{\varepsilon}$.