<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="paper.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>

<paper xmlns="http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/daniele/XML">
  
  <filename>CoveringRadius</filename>
  
  <title>The complexity of the covering radius problem on lattices and
  codes</title>
  
  <author>Venkatesan Guruswami</author>
  <author>Daniele Micciancio</author>
  <author>Oded Regev</author>
  
  <reference>
    <link>http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=101499</link>
    <journal>Computational Complexity</journal>
    <volume>14</volume>
    <pages>90-120</pages>
    <year>2005</year>
    <doi>10.1007/s00037-005-0193-y</doi>
    <note>Invited paper</note>
    <note>Preliminary version in CCC 2004</note>
  </reference>
  
  <abstract>
    <p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
      We initiate the study of the computational complexity of the
      covering radius problem for point lattices, and approximation
      versions of the problem for both lattices and linear codes. We
      also investigate the computational complexity of the shortest
      linearly independent vectors problem, and its relation to the
      covering radius problem for lattices.  For the covering radius
      on n-dimensional lattices, we show that the problem can be
      approximated within any constant factor gamma(n) &gt; 1 in
      random exponential time 2^{O(n)}, it is in AM for gamma(n) = 2,
      in coAM for gamma(n) = sqrt{n / log n}, and in NP intersected
      coNP for gamma(n) = sqrt{n}.  For the covering radius on
      n-dimensional linear codes, we show that the problem can be
      solved in deterministic polynomial time for approximation factor
      gamma(n) = log n, but cannot be solved in polynomial time for
      some gamma(n) = Omega(log log n) unless NP can be simulated in
      deterministic n^{O(log log log n)} time. Moreover, we prove that
      the problem is NP-hard for <em>any</em> constant approximation
      factor, it is Pi_2-hard for <em>some</em> constant approximation
      factor, and it is in AM for approximation factor 2. So, it is
      unlikely to be Pi_2-hard for any constant approximation
      factor. This is a natural hardness of approximation result in
      the polynomial hierarchy.  For the shortest independent vectors
      problem, we give a AM protocol achieving approximation factor
      gamma(n) = sqrt{n / log n}, solving an open problem of Blomer
      and Seifert (STOC'99).
    </p>
  </abstract>
  
  <note>
    Preliminary version in <link doi="10.1109/CCC.2004.1313831">CCC
    2004</link>
  </note>
  
</paper>
