More Like this

1. Approximating the noise sensitivity of a monotone Boolean function

   Rubinfeld, Ronitt ; Vasilyan, Arsen ( January 2019 , International Conference on Randomization and Computation (RANDOM 2019))

   The noise sensitivity of a Boolean function f:{0,1}n→{0,1} is one of its fundamental properties. A function of a positive noise parameter δ, it is denoted as NSδ[f]. Here we study the algorithmic problem of approximating it for monotone f, such that NSδ[f]≥1/nC for constant C, and where δ satisfies 1/n≤δ≤1/2. For such f and δ, we give a randomized algorithm performing O(min(1,n√δlog1.5n)NSδ[f]poly(1ϵ)) queries and approximating NSδ[f] to within a multiplicative factor of (1±ϵ). Given the same constraints on f and δ, we also prove a lower bound of Ω(min(1,n√δ)NSδ[f]⋅nξ) on the query complexity of any algorithm that approximates NSδ[f] to within any constant factor, where ξ can be any positive constant. Thus, our algorithm's query complexity is close to optimal in terms of its dependence on n. We introduce a novel descending-ascending view of noise sensitivity, and use it as a central tool for the analysis of our algorithm. To prove lower bounds on query complexity, we develop a technique that reduces computational questions about query complexity to combinatorial questions about the existence of "thin" functions with certain properties. The existence of such "thin" functions is proved using the probabilistic method. These techniques also yield previously unknown lower bounds onmore »the query complexity of approximating other fundamental properties of Boolean functions: the total influence and the bias.« less
2. Approximating the Distance to Monotonicity of Boolean Functions

   https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611975994.123  

   Pallavoor, Ramesh Krishnan ; Raskhodnikova, Sofya ; Waingarten, Erik ( January 2020 , Proceedings of the 2020 ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2020)

   We design a nonadaptive algorithm that, given a Boolean function f: {0, 1}^n → {0, 1} which is α-far from monotone, makes poly(n, 1/α) queries and returns an estimate that, with high probability, is an O-tilde(\sqrt{n})-approximation to the distance of f to monotonicity. Furthermore, we show that for any constant k > 0, approximating the distance to monotonicity up to n^(1/2−k)-factor requires 2^{n^k} nonadaptive queries, thereby ruling out a poly(n, 1/α)-query nonadaptive algorithm for such approximations. This answers a question of Seshadhri (Property Testing Review, 2014) for the case of nonadaptive algorithms. Approximating the distance to a property is closely related to tolerantly testing that property. Our lower bound stands in contrast to standard (non-tolerant) testing of monotonicity that can be done nonadaptively with O-tilde(n/ε^2) queries. We obtain our lower bound by proving an analogous bound for erasure-resilient testers. An α-erasure-resilient tester for a desired property gets oracle access to a function that has at most an α fraction of values erased. The tester has to accept (with probability at least 2/3) if the erasures can be filled in to ensure that the resulting function has the property and to reject (with probability at least 2/3) if every completion ofmore »erasures results in a function that is ε-far from having the property. Our method yields the same lower bounds for unateness and being a k-junta. These lower bounds improve exponentially on the existing lower bounds for these properties.« less
3. The Polynomial Method Strikes Back: Tight Quantum Query Bounds via Dual Polynomials

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3188745.3188784  

   Bun, Mark ; Kothari, Robin ; Thaler, Justin ( October 2020 , Theory of computing)

   The approximate degree of a Boolean function f is the least degree of a real polynomial that approximates f pointwise to error at most 1/3. The approximate degree of f is known to be a lower bound on the quantum query complexity of f (Beals et al., FOCS 1998 and J. ACM 2001). We find tight or nearly tight bounds on the approximate degree and quantum query complexities of several basic functions. Specifically, we show the following. k-Distinctness: For any constant k, the approximate degree and quantum query complexity of the k-distinctness function is Ω(n3/4−1/(2k)). This is nearly tight for large k, as Belovs (FOCS 2012) has shown that for any constant k, the approximate degree and quantum query complexity of k-distinctness is O(n3/4−1/(2k+2−4)). Image size testing: The approximate degree and quantum query complexity of testing the size of the image of a function [n]→[n] is Ω~(n1/2). This proves a conjecture of Ambainis et al. (SODA 2016), and it implies tight lower bounds on the approximate degree and quantum query complexity of the following natural problems. k-Junta testing: A tight Ω~(k1/2) lower bound for k-junta testing, answering the main open question of Ambainis et al. (SODA 2016). Statistical distance frommore »uniform: A tight Ω~(n1/2) lower bound for approximating the statistical distance of a distribution from uniform, answering the main question left open by Bravyi et al. (STACS 2010 and IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2011). Shannon entropy: A tight Ω~(n1/2) lower bound for approximating Shannon entropy up to a certain additive constant, answering a question of Li and Wu (2017). Surjectivity: The approximate degree of the surjectivity function is Ω~(n3/4). The best prior lower bound was Ω(n2/3). Our result matches an upper bound of O~(n3/4) due to Sherstov (STOC 2018), which we reprove using different techniques. The quantum query complexity of this function is known to be Θ(n) (Beame and Machmouchi, Quantum Inf. Comput. 2012 and Sherstov, FOCS 2015). Our upper bound for surjectivity introduces new techniques for approximating Boolean functions by low-degree polynomials. Our lower bounds are proved by significantly refining techniques recently introduced by Bun and Thaler (FOCS 2017).« less
4. Testing k-Monotonicity

   Canonne, C ; Grigorescu, E. ; Guo, S ; Kumar, A ; Wimmer, K. ( January 2017 , ITCS)

   A Boolean {\em $k$-monotone} function defined over a finite poset domain ${\cal D}$ alternates between the values $0$ and $1$ at most $k$ times on any ascending chain in ${\cal D}$. Therefore, $k$-monotone functions are natural generalizations of the classical {\em monotone} functions, which are the {\em $1$-monotone} functions. Motivated by the recent interest in $k$-monotone functions in the context of circuit complexity and learning theory, and by the central role that monotonicity testing plays in the context of property testing, we initiate a systematic study of $k$-monotone functions, in the property testing model. In this model, the goal is to distinguish functions that are $k$-monotone (or are close to being $k$-monotone) from functions that are far from being $k$-monotone. Our results include the following: \begin{enumerate} \item We demonstrate a separation between testing $k$-monotonicity and testing monotonicity, on the hypercube domain $\{0,1\}^d$, for $k\geq 3$; \item We demonstrate a separation between testing and learning on $\{0,1\}^d$, for $k=\omega(\log d)$: testing $k$-monotonicity can be performed with $2^{O(\sqrt d \cdot \log d\cdot \log{1/\eps})}$ queries, while learning $k$-monotone functions requires $2^{\Omega(k\cdot \sqrt d\cdot{1/\eps})}$ queries (Blais et al. (RANDOM 2015)). \item We present a tolerant test for functions $f\colon[n]^d\to \{0,1\}$ with complexity independent ofmore »$n$, which makes progress on a problem left open by Berman et al. (STOC 2014). \end{enumerate} Our techniques exploit the testing-by-learning paradigm, use novel applications of Fourier analysis on the grid $[n]^d$, and draw connections to distribution testing techniques.« less
5. Sample-Optimal Identity Testing with High Probability

   Diakonikolas, Ilias ; Gouleakis, Themis ; Peebles, John ; Price, Eric ( July 2018 , 45th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Automata)

   We study the problem of testing identity against a given distribution with a focus on the high confidence regime. More precisely, given samples from an unknown distribution p over n elements, an explicitly given distribution q, and parameters 0< epsilon, delta < 1, we wish to distinguish, with probability at least 1-delta, whether the distributions are identical versus epsilon-far in total variation distance. Most prior work focused on the case that delta = Omega(1), for which the sample complexity of identity testing is known to be Theta(sqrt{n}/epsilon^2). Given such an algorithm, one can achieve arbitrarily small values of delta via black-box amplification, which multiplies the required number of samples by Theta(log(1/delta)). We show that black-box amplification is suboptimal for any delta = o(1), and give a new identity tester that achieves the optimal sample complexity. Our new upper and lower bounds show that the optimal sample complexity of identity testing is Theta((1/epsilon^2) (sqrt{n log(1/delta)} + log(1/delta))) for any n, epsilon, and delta. For the special case of uniformity testing, where the given distribution is the uniform distribution U_n over the domain, our new tester is surprisingly simple: to test whether p = U_n versus d_{TV} (p, U_n) >= epsilon, wemore »simply threshold d_{TV}({p^}, U_n), where {p^} is the empirical probability distribution. The fact that this simple "plug-in" estimator is sample-optimal is surprising, even in the constant delta case. Indeed, it was believed that such a tester would not attain sublinear sample complexity even for constant values of epsilon and delta. An important contribution of this work lies in the analysis techniques that we introduce in this context. First, we exploit an underlying strong convexity property to bound from below the expectation gap in the completeness and soundness cases. Second, we give a new, fast method for obtaining provably correct empirical estimates of the true worst-case failure probability for a broad class of uniformity testing statistics over all possible input distributions - including all previously studied statistics for this problem. We believe that our novel analysis techniques will be useful for other distribution testing problems as well.« less