Let $ACC \circ THR$ be the class of constant-depth circuits comprised of AND, OR, and MOD$m$ gates (for some constant $m > 1$), with a bottom layer of gates computing arbitrary linear threshold functions. This class of circuits can be seen as a "midpoint" between $ACC$ (where we know nontrivial lower bounds) and depth-two linear threshold circuits (where nontrivial lower bounds remain open). We give an algorithm for evaluating an arbitrary symmetric function of $2^{n^{o(1)}}$ $ACC \circ THR$ circuits of size $2^{n^{o(1)}}$, on all possible inputs, in $2^n \cdot poly(n)$ time. Several consequences are derived: $\bullet$ The number of satisfying assignments to an $ACC \circ THR$ circuit of subexponential size can be computed in $2^{n-n^{\varepsilon}}$ time (where $\varepsilon > 0$ depends on the depth and modulus of the circuit). $\bullet$ $NEXP$ does not have quasi-polynomial size $ACC \circ THR$ circuits, nor does $NEXP$ have quasi-polynomial size $ACC \circ SYM$ circuits. Nontrivial size lower bounds were not known even for $AND \circ OR \circ THR$ circuits. $\bullet$ Every 0-1 integer linear program with $n$ Boolean variables and $s$ linear constraints is solvable in $2^{n-\Omega(n/((\log M)(\log s)^{5}))}\cdot poly(s,n,M)$ time with high probability, where $M$ upper bounds the bit complexity of the coefficients. (For example, 0-1 integer programs with weights in $[-2^{poly(n)},2^{poly(n)}]$ and $poly(n)$ constraints can be solved in $2^{n-\Omega(n/\log^6 n)}$ time.) We also present an algorithm for evaluating depth-two linear threshold circuits (a.k.a., $THR \circ THR$) with exponential weights and $2^{n/24}$ size on all $2^n$ input assignments, running in $2^n \cdot poly(n)$ time. This is evidence that non-uniform lower bounds for $THR \circ THR$ are within reach.

Thanks. We have received your report. If we find this content to be in
violation of our guidelines,
we will remove it.

Ok