Certified Hardness vs. Randomness for Log-Space

Let $\mathcal{L}$ be a language that can be decided in linear space and let $\epsilon \gt 0$ be any constant. Let $\mathcal{A}$ be the exponential hardness assumption that for every n, membership in $\mathcal{L}$ for inputs of length n cannot be decided by circuits of size smaller than $2^{\epsilon n}$. We prove that for every function $f:\{0,1\}^{*} \rightarrow\{0,1\}$, computable by a randomized logspace algorithm R, there exists a deterministic logspace algorithm D (attempting to compute f), such that on every input x of length n, the algorithm D outputs one of the following:1)The correct value $f(x)$.2)The string: “I am unable to compute $f(x)$ because the hardness assumption $\mathcal{A}$ is false”, followed by a (provenly correct) circuit of size smaller than $2^{\epsilon n^{\prime}}$ for membership in $\mathcal{L}$ for inputs of length $n^{\prime}$, for some $n^{\prime}=\Theta(\log n)$; that is, a circuit that refutes $\mathcal{A}$. Moreover, D is explicitly constructed, given R.We note that previous works on the hardness-versus-randomness paradigm give derandomized algorithms that rely blindly on the hardness assumption. If the hardness assumption is false, the algorithms may output incorrect values, and thus a user cannot trust that an output given by the algorithm is correct. Instead, our algorithm D verifies the computation so that it never outputs an incorrect value. Thus, if D outputs a value for $f(x)$, that value is certified to be correct. Moreover, if D does not output a value for $f(x)$, it alerts that the hardness assumption was found to be false, and refutes the assumption.Our next result is a universal derandomizer for BPL (the class of problems solvable by bounded-error randomized logspace algorithms)
¹
: We give a deterministic algorithm U that takes as an input a randomized logspace algorithm R and an input x and simulates the computation of R on x, deteriministically. Under the widely believed assumption $\mathbf{BPL}=\mathbf{L}$, the space used by U is at most $C_{R} \cdot \log n$ (where $C_{R}$ is a constant depending on R). Moreover, for every constant $c \geq 1$, if $\operatorname{BPL} \subseteq \operatorname{SPACE}\left[(\log (n))^{c}\right]$ then the space used by U is at most $C_{R} \cdot(\log (n))^{c}$.Finally, we prove that if optimal hitting sets for ordered branching programs exist then there is a deterministic logspace algorithm that, given a black-box access to an ordered branching program B of size n, estimates the probability that B accepts on a uniformly random input. This extends the result of (Cheng and Hoza CCC 2020), who proved that an optimal hitting set implies a white-box two-sided derandomization.
¹
Our result is stated and proved for promise-BPL, but we ignore this difference in the abstract.