Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Arpita Korwar
dblp:52/10454
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 5
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Computational complexity · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational complexity › algebraic complexity
polynomial identity testing |
0.7 | 3 | 2016 | Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPs · CCC 2016 Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear Circuits · SIAM J. Comput. 2015 Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity
algebraic complexity |
0.5 | 2 | 2016 | Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPs · CCC 2016 Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity › algebraic complexity
arithmetic branching programs |
0.5 | 2 | 2016 | Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPs · CCC 2016 Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity
circuit complexity |
0.5 | 2 | 2016 | Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPs · CCC 2016 Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity
hitting set |
0.3 | 2 | 2016 | Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear Circuits · SIAM J. Comput. 2015 Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPs · CCC 2016 |
Computational complexity › algebraic complexity
arithmetic circuit complexity |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear Circuits · SIAM J. Comput. 2015 |
Computational complexity › circuit complexity › branching programs
read-once oblivious branching programs |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear Circuits · SIAM J. Comput. 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
rank concentration · 0.5rank of partial derivative matrix · 0.2polynomial map · 0.2evaluation dimension · 0.2distance and base sets · 0.2basis isolation · 0.2basis isolating weight assignment · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-Once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs
Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Nitin Saxena 0001, Thomas Thierauf |
Comput. Complex. | 2 |
| 2016 | Identity Testing for Constant-Width, and Commutative, Read-Once Oblivious ABPsabstractWe give improved hitting-sets for two special cases of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching Programs (ROABP). First is the case of an ROABP with known variable order. The best hitting-set known for this case had cost (nw)^{O(log(n))}, where n is the number of variables and w is the width of the ROABP. Even for a constant-width ROABP, nothing better than a quasi-polynomial bound was known. We improve the hitting-set complexity for the known-order case to n^{O(log(w))}. In particular, this gives the first polynomial time hitting-set for constant-width ROABP (known-order). However, our hitting-set works only over those fields whose characteristic is zero or large enough. To construct the hitting-set, we use the concept of the rank of partial derivative matrix. Unlike previous approaches whose starting point is a monomial map, we use a polynomial map directly. The second case we consider is that of commutative ROABP. The best known hitting-set for this case had cost d^{O(log(w))}(nw)^{O(log(log(w)))}, where d is the individual degree. We improve this hitting-set complexity to (ndw)^{O(log(log(w)))}. We get this by achieving rank concentration more efficiently. Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Nitin Saxena 0001 |
CCC | 2 |
| 2015 | Deterministic Identity Testing for Sum of Read-once Oblivious Arithmetic Branching ProgramsabstractA read-once oblivious arithmetic branching program (ROABP) is an arithmetic branching program (ABP) where each variable occurs in at most one layer. We give the first polynomial time whitebox identity test for a polynomial computed by a sum of constantly many ROABPs. We also give a corresponding blackbox algorithm with quasi-polynomial time complexity n^(O(log(n))). In both the cases, our time complexity is double exponential in the number of ROABPs. ROABPs are a generalization of set-multilinear depth-3 circuits. The prior results for the sum of constantly many set-multilinear depth-3 circuits were only slightly better than brute-force, i.e. exponential-time. Our techniques are a new interplay of three concepts for ROABP: low evaluation dimension, basis isolating weight assignment and low-support rank concentration. We relate basis isolation to rank concentration and extend it to a sum of two ROABPs using evaluation dimension (or partial derivatives). Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Nitin Saxena 0001, Thomas Thierauf |
CCC | 2 |
| 2015 | Hitting-Sets for ROABP and Sum of Set-Multilinear CircuitsabstractWe give an $n^{O(\log n)}$-time ($n$ is the input size) blackbox polynomial identity testing algorithm for unknown-order read-once oblivious arithmetic branching programs (ROABPs). The best time complexity known for blackbox polynomial identity testing (PIT) for this class was $n^{O(\log^2 n)}$ due to Forbes, Saptharishi, and Shpilka [Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2014, pp. 867--875]. Moreover, their result holds only when the individual degree is small, while we do not need any such assumption. With this, we match the time complexity for the unknown-order ROABP with the known-order ROABP (due to Forbes and Shpilka [Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 54th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2013, pp. 243--252]) and also with the depth-3 set-multilinear circuits (due to Agrawal, Saha, and Saxena [Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2013, pp. 321--330]). Our proof is simpler and involves a new technique called basis isolation. The depth-3 model has recently gained much importance, as it has become a stepping stone to understanding general arithmetic circuits. Multilinear depth-3 circuits are known to have exponential lower bounds but no polynomial time blackbox identity tests. In this paper, we take a step toward designing such hitting-sets. We give the first subexponential whitebox PIT for the sum of constantly many set-multilinear depth-3 circuits. To achieve this, we define the notions of distance and base sets. Distance, for a multilinear depth-3 circuit (say, in $n$ variables and $k$ product gates), measures how far the variable partitions corresponding to the product gates are from being a mere refinement of each other. The 1-distance circuits strictly contain the set-multilinear model, while $n$-distance captures general multilinear depth-3. We design a hitting-set in time $(nk)^{O(\Delta \log n)}$ for $\Delta$-distance. Further, we give an extension of our result to models where the distance is large (close to $n$) but is small when restricted to certain base sets (of variables). We also explore a new model of ROABPs where the factor matrices are invertible (called invertible-factor ROABPs). We design a hitting-set in time poly($n^{w^2}$) for width-$w$ invertible-factor ROABPs. Further, we could do without the invertibility restriction when w=2. Previously, the best result for width-2 ROABPs was quasi-polynomial time [M. A. Forbes, R. Saptharishi, and A. Shpilka, Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2014, pp. 867--875]. Manindra Agrawal, Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Nitin Saxena 0001 |
SIAM J. Comput. | 3 |
| 2012 | Planarizing Gadgets for Perfect Matching Do Not Exist
Rohit Gurjar, Arpita Korwar, Jochen Messner, Simon Straub, Thomas Thierauf |
MFCS | 2 |