Document Open Access Logo

Hard Properties with (Very) Short PCPPs and Their Applications

Authors Omri Ben-Eliezer, Eldar Fischer, Amit Levi, Ron D. Rothblum

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.ITCS.2020.9.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.69 MB
  • 27 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Omri Ben-Eliezer
  • Tel Aviv University, Israel
Eldar Fischer
  • Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Amit Levi
  • University of Waterloo, Canada
Ron D. Rothblum
  • Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

Funding

  • Levi, Amit: Supported by the David R. Cheriton Graduate Scholarship. Part of this work was done while the author was visiting the Technion.
  • Rothblum, Ron D.: Supported in part by the Israeli Science Foundation (Grant No. 1262/18), a Milgrom family grant and the Technion Hiroshi Fujiwara cyber security research center and the Israel cyber directorate.

Cite As Get BibTex

Omri Ben-Eliezer, Eldar Fischer, Amit Levi, and Ron D. Rothblum. Hard Properties with (Very) Short PCPPs and Their Applications. In 11th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2020). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 151, pp. 9:1-9:27, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2020.9

Abstract

We show that there exist properties that are maximally hard for testing, while still admitting PCPPs with a proof size very close to linear. Specifically, for every fixed ℓ, we construct a property P^(ℓ)⊆ {0,1}^n satisfying the following: Any testing algorithm for P^(ℓ) requires Ω(n) many queries, and yet P^(ℓ) has a constant query PCPP whose proof size is O(n⋅log^(ℓ)n), where log^(ℓ) denotes the ℓ times iterated log function (e.g., log^(2)n = log log n). The best previously known upper bound on the PCPP proof size for a maximally hard to test property was O(n⋅polylog(n)).
As an immediate application, we obtain stronger separations between the standard testing model and both the tolerant testing model and the erasure-resilient testing model: for every fixed ℓ, we construct a property that has a constant-query tester, but requires Ω(n/log^(ℓ)(n)) queries for every tolerant or erasure-resilient tester.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Interactive proof systems
Keywords
  • PCPP
  • Property testing
  • Tolerant testing
  • Erasure resilient testing
  • Randomized encoding
  • Coding theory

Metrics

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

Related Versions

References

  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. Omri Ben-Eliezer and Eldar Fischer. Earthmover Resilience and Testing in Ordered Structures. In Proceedings of the 33rd Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), pages 18:1-18:35, 2018. Google Scholar
  3. Eli Ben-Sasson, Alessandro Chiesa, Ariel Gabizon, Michael Riabzev, and Nicholas Spooner. Interactive Oracle Proofs with Constant Rate and Query Complexity. In Proceedings of the 44th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pages 40:1-40:15, 2017. Google Scholar
  4. Eli Ben-Sasson, Alessandro Chiesa, and Nicholas Spooner. Interactive Oracle Proofs. In Theory of Cryptography - 14th International Conference TCC Proceedings, Part II, pages 31-60, 2016. Google Scholar
  5. Eli Ben-Sasson, Oded Goldreich, Prahladh Harsha, Madhu Sudan, and Salil P. Vadhan. Robust PCPs of Proximity, Shorter PCPs, and Applications to Coding. SIAM Journal on Computing, 36(4):889-974, 2006. Google Scholar
  6. Eli Ben-Sasson, Yohay Kaplan, Swastik Kopparty, Or Meir, and Henning Stichtenoth. Constant Rate PCPs for Circuit-SAT with Sublinear Query Complexity. Journal of the ACM, 63(4):32:1-32:57, 2016. Google Scholar
  7. Eli Ben-Sasson and Madhu Sudan. Short PCPs with polylog query complexity. SIAM Journal on Computing, 38(2):551-607, 2008. Google Scholar
  8. Piotr Berman, Meiram Murzabulatov, and Sofya Raskhodnikova. Tolerant Testers of Image Properties. In Proceedings of the 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pages 90:1-90:14, 2016. Google Scholar
  9. Eric Blais, Clément L. Canonne, Talya Eden, Amit Levi, and Dana Ron. Tolerant junta testing and the connection to submodular optimization and function isomorphism. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 2113-2132, 2018. Google Scholar
  10. Andrea Campagna, Alan Guo, and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Local reconstructors and tolerant testers for connectivity and diameter. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques, pages 411-424. Springer, 2013. Google Scholar
  11. Anindya De, Elchanan Mossel, and Joe Neeman. Junta correlation is testable. In Proceedings of the 60th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 1549-1563, 2019. Google Scholar
  12. Irit Dinur. The PCP theorem by gap amplification. Journal of the ACM, 54(3):12, 2007. Google Scholar
  13. Irit Dinur and Omer Reingold. Assignment Testers: Towards a Combinatorial Proof of the PCP Theorem. SIAM Journal on Computing, 36(4):975-1024, 2006. Google Scholar
  14. Kashyap Dixit, Sofya Raskhodnikova, Abhradeep Thakurta, and Nithin M. Varma. Erasure-Resilient Property Testing. SIAM Journal on Computing, 47(2):295-329, 2018. Google Scholar
  15. Eldar Fischer and Lance Fortnow. Tolerant versus intolerant testing for Boolean properties. Theory of Computing, 2(9):173-183, 2006. Google Scholar
  16. Eldar Fischer and Ilan Newman. Testing versus estimation of graph properties. SIAM Journal on Computing, 37(2):482-501, 2007. Google Scholar
  17. Eldar Fischer, Ilan Newman, and Jiří Sgall. Functions that have read-twice constant width branching programs are not necessarily testable. Random Structures & Algorithms, 24(2):175-193, 2004. Google Scholar
  18. Oded Goldreich. Computational complexity - A conceptual perspective. Cambridge University Press, 2008. Google Scholar
  19. Oded Goldreich, Shafi Goldwasser, and Dana Ron. Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation. Journal of the ACM, 45(4):653-750, 1998. Google Scholar
  20. Oded Goldreich and Or Meir. A small gap in the gap amplification of assignment testers, 2007. In ECCC, 2007, TR05-46, Comment 3. Google Scholar
  21. Oded Goldreich and Luca Trevisan. Three theorems regarding testing graph properties. Random Structures & Algorithms, 23(1):23-57, 2003. Google Scholar
  22. Ellis Horowitz. A fast method for interpolation using preconditioning. Information Processing Letters, 1(4):157-163, 1972. Google Scholar
  23. Swastik Kopparty and Shubhangi Saraf. Tolerant linearity testing and locally testable codes. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM), pages 601-614. Springer, 2009. Google Scholar
  24. Amit Levi and Erik Waingarten. Lower Bounds for Tolerant Junta and Unateness Testing via Rejection Sampling of Graphs. In Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS), pages 52:1-52:20, 2019. Google Scholar
  25. Florence Jessie MacWilliams and Neil James Alexander Sloane. The theory of error-correcting codes, volume 16. Elsevier, 1977. Google Scholar
  26. Michal Parnas, Dana Ron, and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Tolerant property testing and distance approximation. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 72(6):1012-1042, 2006. Google Scholar
  27. Sofya Raskhodnikova, Noga Ron-Zewi, and Nithin M. Varma. Erasures vs. Errors in Local Decoding and Property Testing. In Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS), pages 63:1-63:21, 2019. Google Scholar
  28. Omer Reingold, Guy N. Rothblum, and Ron D. Rothblum. Constant-round interactive proofs for delegating computation. In Proceedings of the 48th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 49-62, 2016. Google Scholar
  29. Adi Shamir. How to share a secret. Communications of the ACM, 22(11):612-613, 1979. Google Scholar
  30. Daniel A. Spielman. Linear-time encodable and decodable error-correcting codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 42(6):1723-1731, 1996. 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
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact