English

On a Problem Posed by Steve Smale

Numerical Analysis 2011-10-26 v6

Abstract

The 17th of the problems proposed by Steve Smale for the 21st century asks for the existence of a deterministic algorithm computing an approximate solution of a system of nn complex polynomials in nn unknowns in time polynomial, on the average, in the size NN of the input system. A partial solution to this problem was given by Carlos Beltran and Luis Miguel Pardo who exhibited a randomized algorithm doing so. In this paper we further extend this result in several directions. Firstly, we exhibit a linear homotopy algorithm that efficiently implements a non-constructive idea of Mike Shub. This algorithm is then used in a randomized algorithm, call it LV, a la Beltran-Pardo. Secondly, we perform a smoothed analysis (in the sense of Spielman and Teng) of algorithm LV and prove that its smoothed complexity is polynomial in the input size and σ1\sigma^{-1}, where σ\sigma controls the size of of the random perturbation of the input systems. Thirdly, we perform a condition-based analysis of LV. That is, we give a bound, for each system ff, of the expected running time of LV with input ff. In addition to its dependence on NN this bound also depends on the condition of ff. Fourthly, and to conclude, we return to Smale's 17th problem as originally formulated for deterministic algorithms. We exhibit such an algorithm and show that its average complexity is NO(loglogN)N^{O(\log\log N)}. This is nearly a solution to Smale's 17th problem.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.0909.2114,
  title  = {On a Problem Posed by Steve Smale},
  author = {Peter Buergisser and Felipe Cucker},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:0909.2114},
  year   = {2011}
}

Comments

V2: changes in Sections 6.1 and 6.5 leading to improved bounds. V3: confusing typos corrected. V4: restructuring of paper. In particular, the former Section 6 splits into the new Sections 7 and 8. V5: corrected typos, rewrote proofs in Section 8.4. Notes added in Proof. V6: due to a harmless error in the proof of Theorem 3.1, some of the constants appearing in various places had to be adapted

R2 v1 2026-06-21T13:45:16.176Z