Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
David Witmer
dblp:80/11265
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-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 · 6
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
4 papers |
Computational complexity · 78% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 15% Approximation and online algorithms · 5% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 100% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational complexity
proof complexity |
0.7 | 3 | 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP · STOC 2017 How to Refute a Random CSP · FOCS 2015 Goldreich's PRG: Evidence for Near-Optimal Polynomial Stretch · CCC 2014 |
Computational complexity
constraint satisfaction |
0.5 | 2 | 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP · STOC 2017 How to Refute a Random CSP · FOCS 2015 |
Computational complexity › proof complexity
CSP refutation |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP · STOC 2017 |
Computational complexity › proof complexity
refutation |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP · STOC 2017 |
Computational complexity › proof complexity › proof size lower bounds
sum-of-squares lower bounds |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSP · STOC 2017 |
Computational complexity › constraint satisfaction
random constraint satisfaction |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | How to Refute a Random CSP · FOCS 2015 |
Computational complexity › constraint satisfaction › random constraint satisfaction
random CSP refutation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | How to Refute a Random CSP · FOCS 2015 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
pseudorandom generators |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Goldreich's PRG: Evidence for Near-Optimal Polynomial Stretch · CCC 2014 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph theory › graph parameters › graph width parameters › treewidth
bounded treewidth |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Sparsest cut on bounded treewidth graphs: algorithms and hardness results · STOC 2013 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph partitioning |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Sparsest cut on bounded treewidth graphs: algorithms and hardness results · STOC 2013 |
Approximation and online algorithms
sparsest cut |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Sparsest cut on bounded treewidth graphs: algorithms and hardness results · STOC 2013 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph theory › graph parameters › graph width parameters
treewidth |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Sparsest cut on bounded treewidth graphs: algorithms and hardness results · STOC 2013 |
Logic in computer science
higher-order logic |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | How to Refute a Random CSP · FOCS 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
sherali-adams · 0.4lasserre hierarchy · 0.4fourier analysis · 0.4sum-of-squares · 0.3semidefinite programming hierarchy · 0.2approximation algorithm · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Sum of squares lower bounds for refuting any CSPabstractLet P:{0,1}k → {0,1} be a nontrivial k-ary predicate. Consider a random instance of the constraint satisfaction problem (P) on n variables with Δ n constraints, each being P applied to k randomly chosen literals. Provided the constraint density satisfies Δ ≫ 1, such an instance is unsatisfiable with high probability. The refutation problem is to efficiently find a proof of unsatisfiability. Pravesh Kothari, Ryuhei Mori, Ryan O'Donnell, David Witmer |
STOC | 4 |
| 2016 | Lower Bounds for CSP Refutation by SDP Hierarchies
Ryuhei Mori, David Witmer |
APPROX-RANDOM | 2 |
| 2015 | Beating the Random Assignment on Constraint Satisfaction Problems of Bounded DegreeabstractWe show that for any odd k and any instance I of the max-kXOR constraint satisfaction problem, there is an efficient algorithm that finds an assignment satisfying at least a 1/2 + Omega(1/sqrt(D)) fraction of I's constraints, where D is a bound on the number of constraints that each variable occurs in. This improves both qualitatively and quantitatively on the recent work of Farhi, Goldstone, and Gutmann (2014), which gave a quantum algorithm to find an assignment satisfying a 1/2 Omega(D^{-3/4}) fraction of the equations. For arbitrary constraint satisfaction problems, we give a similar result for "triangle-free" instances; i.e., an efficient algorithm that finds an assignment satisfying at least a mu + Omega(1/sqrt(degree)) fraction of constraints, where mu is the fraction that would be satisfied by a uniformly random assignment. Boaz Barak, Ankur Moitra, Ryan O'Donnell, Prasad Raghavendra, Oded Regev 0001, David Steurer, Luca Trevisan 0001, Aravindan Vijayaraghavan, David Witmer, John Wright 0004 |
APPROX-RANDOM | 9 |
| 2015 | How to Refute a Random CSPabstractLet P be a k-ary predicate over a finite alphabet. Consider a random CSP(P) instance I over n variables with m constraints. When m ≫ n the instance will be unsatisfiable with high probability and we want to find a certificate of unsatisfiability. When P is the 3-ary OR predicate, this is the well-studied problem of refuting random 3-SAT formulas and an efficient algorithm is known only when m ≫ n3/2. Understanding the density required for refutation of other predicates is important in cryptography, proof complexity, and learning theory. Previously, it was known that for a k-ary predicate, having m ≫≫n[k/2]constraints suffices for refutation. We give a criterion for predicates that often yields efficient refutation algorithms at much lower densities. Specifically, if P fails to support a t-wise uniform distribution, then there is an efficient algorithm that refutes random CSP(P) instances whp when m ≫ nt/2. Indeed, our algorithm will “somewhat strongly” refute the instance I, certifying Opt(I) ≤ 1 - Ωk(1). If t = k then we get the strongest possible refutation, certifying Opt(I) ≤ E[P] + o(1). This last result is new even for random k-SAT. Prior work on SDP hierarchies has given some evidence that efficient refutation of random CSP(P) may be impossible when m ≫ nt/2; thus there is an indication that our algorithm's dependence on m is optimal for every P, at least in the context of SDP hierarchies. As an application of our result, we falsify assumptions used to show hardness-of-learning in recent work of Daniely, Linial, and Shalev-Shwartz. Sarah R. Allen, Ryan O'Donnell, David Witmer |
FOCS | 3 |
| 2014 | Goldreich's PRG: Evidence for Near-Optimal Polynomial StretchabstractFurthering the study of cryptography in constant parallel time, we give new evidence for the security of Gold Reich's candidate pseudorandom generator with near-optimal, polynomial stretch. Our evidence consists both of security against sub exponential-time linear attacks as well as sub exponential-time attacks using SDP hierarchies such as Sherali-Adams+ and Lasserre/Parrilo. More specifically, instantiating Gold Reich's generator with the 5-ary "Tri-Sum-And" predicate, we get a candidate 5-local PRG which is secure against both linear attacks and attacks based on the Lasserre/Parrilo SDP hierarchy. Previous works with such small locality gave polynomially less stretch and were only shown to be secure against linear attacks. Our result is essentially optimal, as known SDP/spectral techniques show the generator would not be secure if its stretch was higher by any polynomial factor. More generally, we show that (a slight variant of) Gold Reich's generator can have stretch increasing with the degree of the smallest nonzero Fourier coefficient of the predicate while resisting sub exponential-time attacks based on the Sherali-Adams+ SDP hierarchy. Again, the dependence on the degree is (potentially) optimal due to known SDP/spectral methods which succeed at any polynomially higher stretch. Finally, for a large family of predicates we also extend this result to security against the much stronger Lasserre/Parrilo SDP hierarchy. Ryan O'Donnell, David Witmer |
CCC | 2 |
| 2013 | Sparsest cut on bounded treewidth graphs: algorithms and hardness resultsabstractWe give a 2-approximation algorithm for the non-uniform Sparsest Cut problem that runs in time nO(k), where k is the treewidth of the graph. This improves on the previous 22k-approximation in time poly(n) 2O(k) due to Chlamtac et al. [18]. Anupam Gupta 0001, Kunal Talwar, David Witmer |
STOC | 3 |