Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sergei Artemenko
dblp:71/9212
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 6 · 4 first-author
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 · 94% Automated reasoning and model checking · 6% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational complexity
derandomization |
0.7 | 3 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract) · CCC 2015 Pseudorandom generators with optimal seed length for non-boolean poly-size circuits · STOC 2014 |
Computational complexity
circuit complexity |
0.5 | 2 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract) · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity
pseudorandomness |
0.5 | 2 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract) · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity › derandomization
hardness versus randomness |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 |
Computational complexity › derandomization
hitting set generators |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 |
Computational complexity › pseudorandomness
extractors |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract) · CCC 2015 |
Computational complexity › pseudorandomness
pseudorandom generators |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Pseudorandom generators with optimal seed length for non-boolean poly-size circuits · STOC 2014 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › satisfiability
k-SAT |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
satisfiability |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against You · CCC 2016 |
Computational complexity › reduction
nondeterministic reductions |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract) · CCC 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
hardness versus randomness tradeoff · 0.2hardness amplification · 0.2sampling procedures · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | Pseudorandomness When the Odds are Against YouabstractImpagliazzo and Wigderson (STOC 1997) showed that if E=DTIME(2^O(n)) requires size 2^Omega(n) circuits, then every time T constant-error randomized algorithm can be simulated deterministically in time poly(T). However, such polynomial slowdown is a deal breaker when T=2^(alpha*n), for a constant alpha>0, as is the case for some randomized algorithms for NP-complete problems. Paturi and Pudlak (STOC 2010) observed that many such algorithms are obtained from randomized time T algorithms, for T < 2^o(n), with large one-sided error 1-epsilon, for epsilon=2^(-alpha*n), that are repeated 1/epsilon times to yield a constant-error randomized algorithm running in time T/epsilon=2^((alpha+o(1))*n). We show that if E requires size 2^Omega(n) nondeterministic circuits, then there is a poly(n)-time epsilon-HSG (Hitting-Set Generator) H:{0,1}^(O(log(n)) + log(1/epsilon) -> {0,1}^n, implying that time T randomized algorithms with one-sided error 1-epsilon can be simulated in deterministic time poly(T)/epsilon. In particular, under this hardness assumption, the fastest known constant-error randomized algorithm for k-SAT (for k > 3) by Paturi et al. (J. ACM 2005) can be made deterministic with essentially the same time bound. This is the first hardness versus randomness tradeoff for algorithms for NP-complete problems. We address the necessity of our assumption by showing that HSGs with very low error imply hardness for nondeterministic circuits with "few" nondeterministic bits. Applebaum et al. (CCC 2015) showed that "black-box techniques" cannot achieve poly(n)-time computable epsilon-PRGs (Pseudo-Random Generators) for epsilon=n^-omega(1), even if we assume hardness against circuits with oracle access to an arbitrary language in the polynomial time hierarchy. We introduce weaker variants of PRGs with relative error, that do follow under the latter hardness assumption. Specifically, we say that a function G:{0,1}^r -> {0,1}^n is an (epsilon,delta)-re-PRG for a circuit C if (1-epsilon)*Pr[C(U_n)=1] - delta < Pr[C(G(U_r)=1] < (1+epsilon)*Pr[C(U_n)=1] + delta. We construct poly(n)-time computable (epsilon,delta)-re-PRGs with arbitrary polynomial stretch, epsilon=n^-O(1) and delta=2^(-n^Omega(1)). We also construct PRGs with relative error that fool non-boolean distinguishers (in the sense introduced by Dubrov and Ishai (STOC 2006)). Our techniques use ideas from Paturi and Pudlak (STOC 2010), Trevisan and Vadhan (FOCS 2000), Applebaum et al. (CCC 2015). Common themes in our proofs are "composing" a PRG/HSG with a combinatorial object such as dispersers and extractors, and the use of nondeterministic reductions in the spirit of Feige and Lund (Comp. Complexity 1997). Sergei Artemenko, Russell Impagliazzo, Valentine Kabanets, Ronen Shaltiel |
CCC | 1 |
| 2016 | Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions
Benny Applebaum, Sergei Artemenko, Ronen Shaltiel, Guang Yang 0020 |
Comput. Complex. | 2 |
| 2015 | Incompressible Functions, Relative-Error Extractors, and the Power of Nondeterministic Reductions (Extended Abstract)
Benny Applebaum, Sergei Artemenko, Ronen Shaltiel, Guang Yang 0020 |
CCC | 2 |
| 2014 | Pseudorandom generators with optimal seed length for non-boolean poly-size circuitsabstractA sampling procedure for a distribution P over {0, 1}ℓ, is a function C: {0, 1}n → {0, 1}ℓ such that the distribution C(Un) (obtained by applying C on the uniform distribution Un) is the "desired distribution" P. Let n > r ≥ ℓ = nΩ(1). An nb-PRG (defined by Dubrov and Ishai (STOC 2006)) is a function G: {0, 1}r → {0, 1}n such that for every C: {0, 1}n → {0, 1}ℓ in some class of "interesting sampling procedures", C' (Ur) = C(G(Ur)) is close to C(Un) in statistical distance. Sergei Artemenko, Ronen Shaltiel |
STOC | 1 |
| 2014 | Lower Bounds on the Query Complexity of Non-uniform and Adaptive Reductions Showing Hardness Amplification
Sergei Artemenko, Ronen Shaltiel |
Comput. Complex. | 1 |
| 2011 | Lower Bounds on the Query Complexity of Non-uniform and Adaptive Reductions Showing Hardness Amplification
Sergei Artemenko, Ronen Shaltiel |
APPROX-RANDOM | 1 |