Lower Bounds for Constant Query Affine-Invariant LCCs and LTCs

Authors Arnab Bhattacharyya, Sivakanth Gopi

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.55 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Arnab Bhattacharyya
Sivakanth Gopi

Cite AsGet BibTex

Arnab Bhattacharyya and Sivakanth Gopi. Lower Bounds for Constant Query Affine-Invariant LCCs and LTCs. In 31st Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 50, pp. 12:1-12:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)


Affine-invariant codes are codes whose coordinates form a vector space over a finite field and which are invariant under affine transformations of the coordinate space. They form a natural, well-studied class of codes; they include popular codes such as Reed-Muller and Reed-Solomon. A particularly appealing feature of affine-invariant codes is that they seem well-suited to admit local correctors and testers. In this work, we give lower bounds on the length of locally correctable and locally testable affine-invariant codes with constant query complexity. We show that if a code C subset Sigma^{K^n} is an r-query locally correctable code (LCC), where K is a finite field and Sigma is a finite alphabet, then the number of codewords in C is at most exp(O_{K, r, |Sigma|}(n^{r-1})). Also, we show that if C subset Sigma^{K^n} is an r-query locally testable code (LTC), then the number of codewords in C is at most \exp(O_{K, r, |Sigma|}(n^{r-2})). The dependence on n in these bounds is tight for constant-query LCCs/LTCs, since Guo, Kopparty and Sudan (ITCS 2013) construct affine-invariant codes via lifting that have the same asymptotic tradeoffs. Note that our result holds for non-linear codes, whereas previously, Ben-Sasson and Sudan (RANDOM 2011) assumed linearity to derive similar results. Our analysis uses higher-order Fourier analysis. In particular, we show that the codewords corresponding to an affine-invariant LCC/LTC must be far from each other with respect to Gowers norm of an appropriate order. This then allows us to bound the number of codewords, using known decomposition theorems which approximate any bounded function in terms of a finite number of low-degree non-classical polynomials, upto a small error in the Gowers norm.
  • Locally correctable code
  • Locally testable code
  • Affine Invariance
  • Gowers uniformity norm


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


  1. Sanjeev Arora, Carsten Lund, Rajeev Motwani, Madhu Sudan, and Mario Szegedy. Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems. J. ACM, 45(3):501-555, 1998. Google Scholar
  2. Sanjeev Arora and Shmuel Safra. Probabilistic checking of proofs: A new characterization of NP. J. ACM, 45(1):70-122, 1998. Google Scholar
  3. Boaz Barak, Zeev Dvir, Amir Yehudayoff, and Avi Wigderson. Rank bounds for design matrices with applications to combinatorial geometry and locally correctable codes. In Proc. 43rd Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 519-528. ACM, 2011. Google Scholar
  4. Omer Barkol, Yuval Ishai, and Enav Weinreb. On locally decodable codes, self-correctable codes, and t-private PIR. In Proc. 11th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation, pages 311-325. Springer, 2007. Google Scholar
  5. Eli Ben-Sasson, Noga Ron-Zewi, and Madhu Sudan. Sparse affine-invariant linear codes are locally testable. In Proc. 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 561-570. IEEE, 2012. Google Scholar
  6. Eli Ben-Sasson and Madhu Sudan. Robust locally testable codes and products of codes. In Proc. 8th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation, pages 286-297, 2004. Google Scholar
  7. Eli Ben-Sasson and Madhu Sudan. Short PCPs with polylog query complexity. SIAM J. on Comput., 38(2):551-607, 2008. Google Scholar
  8. Eli Ben-Sasson and Madhu Sudan. Limits on the rate of locally testable affine-invariant codes. In Proc. 15th International Workshop on Randomization and Computation, pages 412-423. Springer, 2011. Google Scholar
  9. Arnab Bhattacharyya and Abhishek Bhowmick. Using higher-order Fourier analysis over general fields. Preprint arXiv:1505.00619, 2015. Google Scholar
  10. Arnab Bhattacharyya, Zeev Dvir, Amir Shpilka, and Shubhangi Saraf. Tight lower bounds for 2-query LCCs over finite fields. In Proc. 52nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 638-647. IEEE, 2011. Google Scholar
  11. Abhishek Bhowmick and Shachar Lovett. Bias vs structure of polynomials in large fields, and applications in effective algebraic geometry and coding theory. Preprint arXiv:1506.02047, 2015. Google Scholar
  12. Abhishek Bhowmick and Shachar Lovett. The list decoding radius of Reed-Muller codes over small fields. In Proc. 47th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 277-285, 2015. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2746539.2746543.
  13. Manuel Blum and Sampath Kannan. Designing programs that check their work. J. ACM, 42(1):269-291, 1995. Google Scholar
  14. Manuel Blum, Michael Luby, and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems. J. Comp. Sys. Sci., 47(3):549-595, 1993. Google Scholar
  15. Benny Chor, Eyal Kushilevitz, Oded Goldreich, and Madhu Sudan. Private information retrieval. J. ACM, 45(6):965-981, 1998. Google Scholar
  16. Irit Dinur. The PCP theorem by gap amplification. J. ACM, 54(3):12, 2007. Google Scholar
  17. Zeev Dvir, Shubhangi Saraf, and Avi Wigderson. Breaking the quadratic barrier for 3-LCC’s over the reals. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 784-793. ACM, 2014. Google Scholar
  18. Zeev Dvir and Amir Shpilka. Locally decodable codes with two queries and polynomial identity testing for depth 3 circuits. SIAM J. on Comput., 36(5):1404-1434, 2007. Google Scholar
  19. Oded Goldreich, Howard Karloff, Leonard J Schulman, and Luca Trevisan. Lower bounds for linear locally decodable codes and private information retrieval. In Proc. 17th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 143-151. IEEE, 2002. Google Scholar
  20. Oded Goldreich and Madhu Sudan. Locally testable codes and PCPs of almost-linear length. J. ACM, 53(4):558-655, July 2006. Google Scholar
  21. William T Gowers. A new proof of Szemerédi’s theorem. Geom. Funct. Anal., 11(3):465-588, 2001. Google Scholar
  22. Ben Green. Montreal lecture notes on quadratic Fourier analysis. Preprint arXiv:math/0604089, 2006. Google Scholar
  23. Alan Guo, Swastik Kopparty, and Madhu Sudan. New affine-invariant codes from lifting. In Proc. 4th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 529-540. ACM, 2013. Google Scholar
  24. Alan Xinyu Guo. Some closure features of locally testable affine-invariant properties. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2013. Google Scholar
  25. Venkatesan Guruswami, Madhu Sudan, Ameya Velingker, and Carol Wang. Limitations on testable affine-invariant codes in the high-rate regime. In Proc. 26th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1312-1325. SIAM, 2015. Google Scholar
  26. T. Kasami, S. Lin, and W.W. Peterson. Some results on cyclic codes which are invariant under the affine group and their applications. Inform. and Comput., 11(5-6):475-496, 1967. Google Scholar
  27. Jonathan Katz and Luca Trevisan. On the efficiency of local decoding procedures for error-correcting codes. In Proc. 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 80-86. ACM, 2000. Google Scholar
  28. Tali Kaufman and Madhu Sudan. Algebraic property testing: the role of invariance. In Proc. 40th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 403-412. ACM, 2008. Google Scholar
  29. Iordanis Kerenidis and Ronald de Wolf. Exponential lower bound for 2-query locally decodable codes via a quantum argument. In Proc. 35th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 106-115. ACM, 2003. Google Scholar
  30. Richard J Lipton. Efficient checking of computations. In Proc. 7th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 207-215. Springer, 1990. Google Scholar
  31. Or Meir. Combinatorial construction of locally testable codes. SIAM J. on Comput., 39(2):491-544, 2009. Google Scholar
  32. Madhu Sudan, Luca Trevisan, and Salil Vadhan. Pseudorandom generators without the XOR lemma. In Proc. 31st Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 537-546. ACM, 1999. Google Scholar
  33. Terence Tao. Higher order Fourier analysis, volume 142. American Mathematical Soc., 2012. Google Scholar
  34. Terence Tao and Tamar Ziegler. The inverse conjecture for the Gowers norm over finite fields in low characteristic. Ann. Comb., 16(1):121-188, 2012. Google Scholar
  35. Madhur Tulsiani and Julia Wolf. Quadratic Goldreich-Levin theorems. SIAM Journal on Computing, 43(2):730-766, 2014. Google Scholar
  36. Michael Viderman. Explicit strong LTCs with inverse poly-log rate and constant soundness. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), 22:20, 2015. URL: http://eccc.hpi-web.de/report/2015/020.
  37. David Woodruff. New lower bounds for general locally decodable codes. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), 14(006), 2007. Google Scholar
  38. David P Woodruff. A quadratic lower bound for three-query linear locally decodable codes over any field. J. Comput. Sci. Technol., 27(4):678-686, 2012. Google Scholar
  39. Sergey Yekhanin. Locally decodable codes. In Computer Science-Theory and Applications, pages 289-290. Springer, 2011. 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