Lattice Problems beyond Polynomial Time
Divesh Aggarwal, Huck Bennett, Zvika Brakerski, Alexander Golovnev, Rajendra Kumar, Zeyong Li, Spencer Peters, Noah Stephens-Davidowitz, Vinod Vaikuntanathan
Abstract
We study the complexity of lattice problems in a world where algorithms, reductions, and protocols can run in superpolynomial time. Specifically, we revisit four foundational results in this context-two protocols and two worst-case to average-case reductions. We show how to improve the approximation factor in each result by a factor of roughly n/ log n when running the protocol or reduction in 2 εn time instead of polynomial time, and we show a novel protocol with no polynomial-time analog. Our results are as follows. 1. We show a worst-case to average-case reduction proving that secret-key cryptography (specifically, collision-resistant hash functions) exists if the (decision version of the) Shortest Vector Problem (SVP) cannot be approximated to within a factor of O( √ n) in 2 εn time for any constant ε > 0. This extends to our setting Ajtai's celebrated polynomial-time reduction for the Short Integer Solutions problem (SIS) [STOC, 1996], which showed (after improvements by Micciancio and Regev [FOCS, 2004; and SIAM J. Computing, 2007]) that secret-key cryptography exists if SVP cannot be approximated to within a factor of O(n) in polynomial time. 2. We show another worst-case to average-case reduction proving that public-key cryptography exists if SVP cannot be approximated to within a factor of O(n) in 2 εn time. This extends Regev's celebrated polynomial-time reduction for the Learning with Errors problem (LWE) [STOC, 2005; and J. ACM, 2009], which achieved an approximation factor of O(n 1.5 ). In fact, Regev's reduction is quantum, but we prove our result under a classical reduction, generalizing Peikert's polynomial-time classical reduction [STOC, 2009], which achieved an approximation factor of O(n 2 ). 3. We show that the (decision version of the) Closest Vector Problem (CVP) with a constant approximation factor has a coAM protocol with a 2 εn -time verifier. This generalizes the i
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 1fcbe80d-1d37-44f2-a0b2-0f49fe1e9e70Cited by top-tier papers3
- Diffusion Posterior Sampling is Computationally IntractableShivam Gupta, Ajil Jalal, Aditya Parulekar, Eric Price et al.ICML 2024 · 18 citations
- Why we couldn't prove SETH hardness of the Closest Vector Problem for even norms!Divesh Aggarwal, Rajendra KumarFOCS 2023 · 1 citation
- A Sharp Characterization of PessilandShuichi Hirahara, Mikito NanashimaSTOC 2026
Builds on2
- Fine-grained hardness of CVP(P) - Everything that we can prove (and nothing else)Divesh Aggarwal, Huck Bennett, Alexander Golovnev, Noah Stephens-DavidowitzSODA 2021 · 22 citations
- Polynomial formulations as a barrier for reduction-based hardness proofsTatiana Belova, Alexander Golovnev, Alexander S. Kulikov, Ivan Mihajlin et al.SODA 2023 · 3 citations
Related papers
- Deterministic Hardness of Approximation of Unique-SVP and GapSVP in ℓp Norms for p>2Yahli Hecht, Muli SafraSTOC 2026 · 8 citations
- Slide Reduction, Revisited - Filling the Gaps in SVP ApproximationDivesh Aggarwal, Jianwei Li, Phong Q. Nguyen, Noah Stephens-DavidowitzCRYPTO 2020 · 33 citations
- Solving the Shortest Vector Problem in 20.63269n+o(n) Time on Random LatticesAmaury Pouly, Yixin ShenEUROCRYPT 2026 · 9 citations
- Just How Hard Are Rotations of ? Algorithms and Cryptography with the Simplest LatticeHuck Bennett, Atul Ganju, Pura Peetathawatchai, Noah Stephens-DavidowitzEUROCRYPT 2023 · 26 citations
- On One-way Functions and Kolmogorov ComplexityYanyi Liu, Rafael PassFOCS 2020 · 39 citations
