Refining the Adaptivity Notion in the Huge Object Model

Authors Tomer Adar , Eldar Fischer



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.APPROX-RANDOM.2024.45.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.78 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Tomer Adar
  • Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Eldar Fischer
  • Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

Cite AsGet BibTex

Tomer Adar and Eldar Fischer. Refining the Adaptivity Notion in the Huge Object Model. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 317, pp. 45:1-45:16, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2024.45

Abstract

The Huge Object model for distribution testing, first defined by Goldreich and Ron in 2022, combines the features of classical string testing and distribution testing. In this model we are given access to independent samples from an unknown distribution P over the set of strings {0,1}ⁿ, but are only allowed to query a few bits from the samples. The distinction between adaptive and non-adaptive algorithms, which occurs naturally in the realm of string testing (while being irrelevant for classical distribution testing), plays a substantial role also in the Huge Object model. In this work we show that the full picture in the Huge Object model is much richer than just that of the adaptive vs. non-adaptive dichotomy. We define and investigate several models of adaptivity that lie between the fully-adaptive and the completely non-adaptive extremes. These models are naturally grounded by observing the querying process from each sample independently, and considering the "algorithmic flow" between them. For example, if we allow no information at all to cross over between samples (up to the final decision), then we obtain the locally bounded adaptive model, arguably the "least adaptive" one apart from being completely non-adaptive. A slightly stronger model allows only a "one-way" information flow. Even stronger (but still far from being fully adaptive) models follow by taking inspiration from the setting of streaming algorithms. To show that we indeed have a hierarchy, we prove a chain of exponential separations encompassing most of the models that we define.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Streaming, sublinear and near linear time algorithms
Keywords
  • Huge-Object model
  • Property Testing

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Tomer Adar, Eldar Fischer, and Amit Levi. Support testing in the huge object model. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques, APPROX/RANDOM 2024, August 28-30, 2024, London, United Kingdom, volume 317. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. Google Scholar
  2. Maryam Aliakbarpour, Andrew McGregor, Jelani Nelson, and Erik Waingarten. Estimation of entropy in constant space with improved sample complexity. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference on Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022. Google Scholar
  3. Noga Alon, Michael Krivelevich, Ilan Newman, and Mario Szegedy. Regular languages are testable with a constant number of queries. SIAM Journal on Computing, 30(6):1842-1862, 2001. Google Scholar
  4. Tugkan Batu, Eldar Fischer, Lance Fortnow, Ravi Kumar, Ronitt Rubinfeld, and Patrick White. Testing random variables for independence and identity. In Proceedings 42nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 442-451. IEEE, 2001. Google Scholar
  5. Tugkan Batu, Lance Fortnow, Ronitt Rubinfeld, Warren D Smith, and Patrick White. Testing that distributions are close. In Proceedings 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 259-269. IEEE, 2000. Google Scholar
  6. Manuel Blum, Michael Luby, and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems. In Proceedings of the twenty-second annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 73-83, 1990. Google Scholar
  7. Clément L. Canonne. A Survey on Distribution Testing: Your Data is Big. But is it Blue? Number 9 in Graduate Surveys. Theory of Computing Library, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.gs.2020.009.
  8. Sourav Chakraborty, Eldar Fischer, Arijit Ghosh, Gopinath Mishra, and Sayantan Sen. Testing of index-invariant properties in the huge object model. CoRR, abs/2207.12514, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.12514.
  9. Funda Ergün, Ravi Kumar, and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Fast approximate pcps. In Proceedings of the thirty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 41-50, 1999. Google Scholar
  10. Oded Goldreich. Introduction to property testing. Cambridge University Press, 2017. Google Scholar
  11. Oded Goldreich and Dana Ron. On testing expansion in bounded-degree graphs. Studies in Complexity and Cryptography. Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation, pages 68-75, 2011. Google Scholar
  12. Oded Goldreich and Dana Ron. Testing distributions of huge objects. In Mark Braverman, editor, 13th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2022, January 31 - February 3, 2022, Berkeley, CA, USA, volume 215 of LIPIcs, pages 78:1-78:19. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2022.78.
  13. David Peleg. Distributed computing: a locality-sensitive approach. SIAM, 2000. Google Scholar
  14. Ronitt Rubinfeld and Madhu Sudan. Self-testing polynomial functions efficiently and over rational domains. In SODA, pages 23-32, 1992. Google Scholar
  15. Ronitt Rubinfeld and Madhu Sudan. Robust characterizations of polynomials with applications to program testing. SIAM Journal on Computing, 25(2):252-271, 1996. Google Scholar
  16. Andrew Chi-Chin Yao. Probabilistic computations: Toward a unified measure of complexity. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 222-227, 1977. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail