Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of testing if a function depends on a small number of linear directions of its input data. We call a function $f$ a linear $k$-junta if it is completely determined by some $k$-dimensional subspace of the input space. In this paper, we study the problem of testing whether a given $n$ variable function $f : \mathbb{R}^n \to \{0,1\}$, is a linear $k$-junta or $ε$-far from all linear $k$-juntas, where the closeness is measured with respect to the Gaussian measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$. Linear $k$-juntas are a common generalization of two fundamental classes from Boolean function analysis (both of which have been studied in property testing) $\textbf{1.}$ $k$- juntas which are functions on the Boolean cube which depend on at most k of the variables and $\textbf{2.}$ intersection of $k$ halfspaces, a fundamental geometric concept class. We show that the class of linear $k$-juntas is not testable, but adding a surface area constraint makes it testable: we give a $\mathsf{poly}(k \cdot s/ε)$-query non-adaptive tester for linear $k$-juntas with surface area at most $s$. We show that the polynomial dependence on $s$ is necessary. Moreover, we show that if the function is a linear $k$-junta with surface area at most $s$, we give a $(s \cdot k)^{O(k)}$-query non-adaptive algorithm to learn the function up to a rotation of the basis. In particular, this implies that we can test the class of intersections of $k$ halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^n$ with query complexity independent of $n$.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".