The DOI matches its Crossref record.
More on average case vs approximation complexity
Abstract
We consider the problem to determine the maximal number of satisfiable equations in a linear system chosen at random. We make several plausible conjectures about the average case hardness of this problem for some natural distributions on the instances, and relate them to several interesting questions in the theory of approximation algorithms and in cryptography. Namely we show that our conjectures imply the following facts: (1) Feige's hypothesis about the hardness of refuting a random 3CNF is true, which in turn implies inapproximability within a constant for several combinatorial problems, for which no NP-hardness of approximation is known. (2) It is hard to approximate the nearest codeword within factor n/sup 1 - /spl epsi//. (3) It is hard to estimate the rigidity of a matrix. More exactly, it is hard to distinguish between matrices of low rigidity and random ones. (4) There exists a secure public-key (probabilistic) cryptosystem, based on the intractability of decoding of random binary codes. Our conjectures are strong in that they assume cryptographic hardness: no polynomial algorithm can solve the problem on any non-negligible fraction of inputs. Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge no efficient algorithms are currently known that refute any of our hardness conjectures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography
Regev, O. (2009) · Journal of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1568318.1568324 · Cited by 2,315
On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography
Regev, O. (2005) · Proceedings of the thirty-seventh annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing · doi:10.1145/1060590.1060603 · Cited by 2,313
CRYSTALS - Kyber: A CCA-Secure Module-Lattice-Based KEM
Bos, J., Ducas, L., Kiltz, E., Lepoint, T., Lyubashevsky, V., Schanck, J. M., Schwabe, P., Seiler, G., & Stehle, D. (2018) · 2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P) · doi:10.1109/eurosp.2018.00032 · Cited by 1,192
Better Key Sizes (and Attacks) for LWE-Based Encryption
Lindner, R., & Peikert, C. (2011) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19074-2_21 · Cited by 688
Decoding Random Binary Linear Codes in 2 n/20: How 1 + 1 = 0 Improves Information Set Decoding
Becker, A., Joux, A., May, A., & Meurer, A. (2012) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-29011-4_31 · Cited by 398
Metadata
- Authors
- Alekhnovich, M.
- Venue
- 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2003. Proceedings.
- Publisher
- IEEE Computer. Soc
- Published
- 2004-02-03
- Pages
- 298-307
- ISSN
- 0272-5428 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2171001107
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.15
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: More on average case vs approximation complexity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/sfcs.2003.1238204
- The paper
- Alekhnovich, M. (2004). More on average case vs approximation complexity. 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2003. Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1109/sfcs.2003.1238204
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.