arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 0802.2857

Lower bounds for adaptive linearity tests

Shachar Lovett
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Linearity tests are randomized algorithms which have oracle access to the truth table of some function f, and are supposed to distinguish between linear functions and functions which are far from linear. Linearity tests were first introduced by (Blum, Luby and Rubenfeld, 1993), and were later used in the PCP theorem, among other applications. The quality of a linearity test is described by its correctness c - the probability it accepts linear functions, its soundness s - the probability it accepts functions far from linear, and its query complexity q - the number of queries it makes. Linearity tests were studied in order to decrease the soundness of linearity tests, while keeping the query complexity small (for one reason, to improve PCP constructions). Samorodnitsky and Trevisan (Samorodnitsky and Trevisan 2000) constructed the Complete Graph Test, and prove that no Hyper Graph Test can perform better than the Complete Graph Test. Later in (Samorodnitsky and Trevisan 2006) they prove, among other results, that no non-adaptive linearity test can perform better than the Complete Graph Test. Their proof uses the algebraic machinery of the Gowers Norm. A result by (Ben-Sasson, Harsha and Raskhodnikova 2005) allows to generalize this lower bound also to adaptive linearity tests. We also prove the same optimal lower bound for adaptive linearity test, but our proof technique is arguably simpler and more direct than the one used in (Samorodnitsky and Trevisan 2006). We also study, like (Samorodnitsky and Trevisan 2006), the behavior of linearity tests on quadratic functions. However, instead of analyzing the Gowers Norm of certain functions, we provide a more direct combinatorial proof, studying the behavior of linearity tests on random quadratic functions...

Explore related subjects

cs.CCcs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shachar Lovett. 2008-02-20. Lower bounds for adaptive linearity tests. https://arxiv.org/abs/0802.2857

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Computational Complexity of Holant Problems on 4-regular Graphs from the Stable Subgroup Sequence of $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$

The Holant framework provides a general setting for studying counting problems and includes graph homomorphisms (\#GH) and counting constraint satisfaction problems (\#CSP) as special cases. Over the past twenty years, a series of computational complexity dichotomies have been established for Holant problems, but the classification for complex-valued signatures is still open. The main obstacle is the case in which all signatures have even arity. In this paper, we establish a dichotomy for Holant problems with a complex-valued 4-ary signature, which is a key base case for the full classification of Holant problems. We present a new strategy by introducing Schur's theorem, the classification of finite subgroups of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ and stable subgroup sequences into the proof. These new techniques are of independent interest.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Topology inside NC$^1$

We show that ACC$^0$ is precisely what can be computed with constant-width circuits of polynomial size and polylogarithmic genus. This extends a characterization given by Hansen, showing that planar constant-width circuits also characterize ACC$^0$. Thus polylogarithmic genus provides no additional computational power in this model. We consider other generalizations of planarity, including crossing number and thickness. We show that constant-width circuits of polynomial size and thickness two already suffice to capture all of NC$^1$.

cs.CC↗