4 ms·
For small n, you can reasonably brute-force all (n x n) multiplication formulae in characteristic 2 because there's a naive bound on the number of element multi
by klyrs 4y ago
For small n, you can reasonably brute-force all (n x n) multiplication formulae in characteristic 2 because there's a naive bound on the number of element multiplications and the coefficients are binary. As n gets large (say, n>3?), the cost of brute-force becomes prohibitive.
Beyond brute-force, I imagine that this problem could be phrased as a max-sat problem, mixed-integer linear program or similar. There are generic solvers that can get solutions for problems of moderate size. But unless it's a fairly rote translation to the solver's native representation, it's often better to write a custom solver and port heuristics into the notation native to the problem. As far as I understand it, that's the approach that the Fawzi et al and TFA took.
- js8 4y agoI was wondering, why use Deepmind when you can just use SAT solver? I am not saying SAT solvers cannot be improved with AI, maybe they can.
- klyrs 4y agoNote my uncertainty about the suitability of a max-sat formulation. But also note who did the Fawzi et al result: the DeepMind team at Google. I think that dogfooding their own stuff is an understandable default.
- fcholf 4y agoActually, this has been done: https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.11391 https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.11391