Communication Complexity of Set-Disjointness for All Probabilities.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study set-disjointness in a generalized model of randomized two-party communication where the probability of acceptance must be at least α(n) on yes-inputs and at most β(n) on no-inputs, for some functions α(n) > β(n). Our main result is a complete characterization of the private-coin communication complexity of set-disjointness for all functions α and β, and a near-complete characterization for public-coin protocols. In particular, we obtain a simple proof of a theorem of Braverman and Moitra (STOC 2013), who studied the case where α = 1/2+ (n) and β = 1/2− (n). The following contributions play a crucial role in our characterization and are interesting in their own right. (1) We introduce two communication analogues of the classical complexity class that captures small bounded-error computations: we define a “restricted” class SBP (which lies between MA and AM) and an “unrestricted” class USBP. The distinction between them is analogous to the distinction between the well-known communication classes PP and UPP. (2) We show that the SBP communication complexity is precisely captured by the classical corruption lower bound method. This sharpens a theorem of Klauck (CCC 2003). (3) We use information complexity arguments to prove a linear lower bound on the USBP complexity of set-disjointness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it