Document Open Access Logo

Testing Versus Estimation of Graph Properties, Revisited

Authors Lior Gishboliner, Nick Kushnir, Asaf Shapira

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.73 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Lior Gishboliner
  • ETH Zürich, Switzerland
Nick Kushnir
  • School of Mathematics, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Asaf Shapira
  • School of Mathematics, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Cite AsGet BibTex

Lior Gishboliner, Nick Kushnir, and Asaf Shapira. Testing Versus Estimation of Graph Properties, Revisited. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 275, pp. 46:1-46:18, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)


A graph G on n vertices is ε-far from property P if one should add/delete at least ε n² edges to turn G into a graph satisfying P. A distance estimator for P is an algorithm that given G and α, ε > 0 distinguishes between the case that G is (α-ε)-close to 𝒫 and the case that G is α-far from 𝒫. If P has a distance estimator whose query complexity depends only on ε, then P is said to be estimable. Every estimable property is clearly also testable, since testing corresponds to estimating with α = ε. A central result in the area of property testing is the Fischer-Newman theorem, stating that an inverse statement also holds, that is, that every testable property is in fact estimable. The proof of Fischer and Newmann was highly ineffective, since it incurred a tower-type loss when transforming a testing algorithm for P into a distance estimator. This raised the natural problem, studied recently by Fiat-Ron and by Hoppen-Kohayakawa-Lang-Lefmann-Stagni, whether one can find a transformation with a polynomial loss. We obtain the following results. - We show that if P is hereditary, then one can turn a tester for P into a distance estimator with an exponential loss. This is an exponential improvement over the result of Hoppen et. al., who obtained a transformation with a double exponential loss. - We show that for every P, one can turn a testing algorithm for P into a distance estimator with a double exponential loss. This improves over the transformation of Fischer-Newman that incurred a tower-type loss. Our main conceptual contribution in this work is that we manage to turn the approach of Fischer-Newman, which was inherently ineffective, into an efficient one. On the technical level, our main contribution is in establishing certain properties of Frieze-Kannan Weak Regular partitions that are of independent interest.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Mathematics of computing → Approximation algorithms
  • Testing
  • estimation
  • weak regularity
  • randomized algorithms
  • graph theory
  • Frieze-Kannan Regularity


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. N. Alon, B. Chazelle, S. Comandur, and D. Liue. Estimating the distance to a monotone function. Random Struct Algorithms, 31:371-383, 2007. Google Scholar
  2. N. Alon, E. Fischer, M. Krivelevich, and M. Szegedy. Efficient testing of large graphs. Combinatorica, 20:451-476, 2000. Google Scholar
  3. N. Alon, E. Fischer, I. Newman, and A. Shapira. A combinatorial characterization of the testable graph properties: it’s all about regularity,. SIAM J Comput, 39:143-167, 2009. Google Scholar
  4. N. Alon and J. Fox. Easily testable graph properties. Combin Probab. Comput, 24:646-657, 2015. Google Scholar
  5. N. Alon and A. Shapira. A characterization of the (natural) graph properties testable with one-sided error. SIAM J Comput., 37:1703-1727, 2008. Google Scholar
  6. T. Batu, F. Ergun, J. Kilian, A. Magen, S. Raskhodnikova, R. Rubinfeld, and R. Sami. A sublinear algorithm for weakly approximating edit distance. ACM Comput Surv., 35:316-324, 2003. Google Scholar
  7. T. Batu, L. Fortnow, R. Rubinfeld, W. Smith, and P. White. Testing closeness of discrete distributions. Journal of the ACM, 60:1-25, 2013. Google Scholar
  8. P. Berman, M. Murzabulatov, and S. Raskhodnikova. Tolerant testers of image properties. Proc. of ICALP, pages 1-14, 2016. Google Scholar
  9. E. Blais, C. Canonne, T. Eden, A. Levi, and D. Ron. Tolerant junta testing and the connection to submodular optimization and function isomorphism. ACM Trans Comput. Theory, 11, 2019. Google Scholar
  10. C. Borgs, J. Chayes, L. Lovász, V. T. Sós, B. Szegedy, and K. Vesztergombi. Graph limits and parameter testing. Proc. of STOC, pages 261-270, 2006. Google Scholar
  11. A. Campagna, A. Guo, and R. Rubinfeld. Local reconstructors and tolerant testers for connectivity and diameter. Proc. of APPROX, pages 411-424, 2013. Google Scholar
  12. D. Conlon and J. Fox. Bounds for graph regularity and removal lemmas. Geom Funct. Anal, 22:1191-1256, 2012. Google Scholar
  13. T. Eden, R. Levi, and D. Ron. Testing bounded arboricity. Proc. of SODA, pages 2081-2092, 2018. Google Scholar
  14. N. Fiat and D. Ron. On efficient distance approximation for graph properties. Proc. of SODA, pages 1618-1637, 2021. Google Scholar
  15. E. Fischer and L. Fortnow. Tolerant versus intolerant testing for boolean properties. Theory Comput., 2:173-183, 2006. Google Scholar
  16. E. Fischer and I. Newman. Testing versus estimation of graph properties. SIAM J Comput., 37:482-501, 2007. Google Scholar
  17. A. Frieze and R. Kannan. The regularity lemma and approximation schemes for dense problems. Proc. of FOCS, pages 12-20, 1996. Google Scholar
  18. A. Frieze and R. Kannan. Quick approximation to matrices and applications. Combinatorica, 19:175-220, 1999. Google Scholar
  19. L. Gishboliner and A. Shapira. Removal lemmas with polynomial bounds. Proc. of STOC, pages 510-522, 2017. Google Scholar
  20. O. Goldreich. Introduction to Property Testing. Cambridge University Press, 2017. Google Scholar
  21. O. Goldreich, S. Goldwasser, and D. Ron. Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation. Journal of the ACM, 45:653-750, 1998. Google Scholar
  22. O. Goldreich and L. Trevisan. Three theorems regarding testing graph properties. Random Struct Algorithms, 23:23-57, 2003. Google Scholar
  23. V. Guruswami and A. Rudra. Tolerant locally testable codes. Proc. of RANDOM, pages 306-317, 2005. Google Scholar
  24. C. Hoppen, Y. Kohayakawa, R. Lang, H. Lefmann, and H. Stagni. Estimating parameters associated with monotone properties,. Combin. Probab. Comput., 29(2020):616-632, 2016. Google Scholar
  25. C. Hoppen, Y. Kohayakawa, R. Lang, H. Lefmann, and H. Stagni. On the query complexity of estimating the distance to hereditary graph properties. SIAM J Discret. Math., 35:1238-1251, 2021. Google Scholar
  26. S. Kopparty and S. Saraf. Tolerant linearity testing and locally testable codes. Proc. of RANDOM, pages 601-614, 2009. Google Scholar
  27. L. Lovász and B. Szegedy. Szemerédi’s lemma for the analyst. Geom. Funct. Anal, 17:252-270, 2007. Google Scholar
  28. S. Marko and D. Ron. Distance approximation in bounded-degree and general sparse graphs. ACM Trans. Algorithms, 5:22:1-22:28, 2009. Google Scholar
  29. G. Moshkovitz and A. Shapira. A sparse regular approximation lemma. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 371:6779-6814, 2019. Google Scholar
  30. M. Parnas, D. Ron, and R. Rubinfeld. Tolerant property testing and distance approximation. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 72:1012-1042, 2006. Google Scholar
  31. V. Rödl and R. Duke. On graphs with small subgraphs of large chromatic number. Graphs and Combinatorics, 1:91-96, 1985. Google Scholar
  32. V. Rödl and M. Schacht. Generalizations of the removal lemma. Combinatorica, 29:467-501, 2009. Google Scholar
  33. V. Rödl and M. Schacht. Regularity lemmas for graphs. Fete of Combinatorics and Computer Science, vol. 20 series, Bolyai Soc Math. Stud, pages 287-325, 2010. Google Scholar
  34. A. Shapira and H. Stagni. A tight bound for testing partition properties. 2023. Google Scholar
  35. E. Szemerédi. Regular partitions of graphs, 1978. In Proc. Colloque Inter CNRS (J. C. Bermond, J. C. Fournier, M. Las Vergnas and D. Sotteau, eds.). Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail