MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082318583 · doi:10.1137/20m135515x

Relaxed Locally Correctable Codes with Nearly-Linear Block Length and Constant Query Complexity

2022· article· en· W3082318583 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Chiesa, Tom Gur, Igor Shinkar

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Computing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCode wordDecoding methodsBlock (permutation group theory)List decodingConstant (computer programming)Block codeUpper and lower boundsAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsComputer scienceConcatenated error correction code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Locally correctable codes (LCCs) are error correcting codes C : \Sigmak \rightarrow \Sigman which admit local algorithms that correct any individual symbol of a corrupted codeword via a minuscule number of queries. For systematic codes, this notion is stronger than that of locally decodable codes (LDCs), where the goal is to only recover individual symbols of the message. One of the central problems in algorithmic coding theory is to construct O(1)-query LCCs and LDCs with minimal block length. Alas, state-of-the-art of such codes requires super-polynomial block length to admit O(1)-query algorithms for local correction and decoding, despite much attention during the last two decades. The study of relaxed LCCs and LDCs, which allow the correction algorithm to abort (but not err) on a small fraction of the locations, provides a way to circumvent this barrier. This relaxation turned out to allow constant-query correcting and decoding algorithms for codes with polynomial block length. Focusing on local correction, Gur, Ramnarayan, and Rothblum [Proceedings of the 9th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS'18, 2018, pp. 1--27] showed that there exist O(1)-query relaxed LCCs that achieve nearly-quartic block length n = k4+\alpha, for an arbitrarily small constant \alpha > 0. We construct an O(1)-query relaxed LCC with nearly-linear block length n = k1+\alpha, for an arbitrarily small constant \alpha > 0. This significantly narrows the gap between the lower bound which states that there are no O(1)-query relaxed LCCs with block length n = k1+o(1). In particular, our construction matches the parameters achieved by Ben-Sasson et al. [SIAM J. Comput., 36 (2006), pp. 889--974], who constructed relaxed LDCs with the same parameters. This resolves an open problem raised by Gur, Ramnarayan, and Rothblum [Proceedings of the 9th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS'18, 2018, pp. 1--27].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on ComputingSame topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207