On List Recovery of High-Rate Tensor Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We continue the study of list recovery properties of high-rate tensor codes, initiated by Hemenway, Ron-Zewi, and Wootters (FOCS'17). In that work it was shown that the tensor product of an efficient (poly-time) high-rate globally list recoverable code is approximately locally list recoverable, as well as globally list recoverable in probabilistic near-linear time. This was used in turn to give the first capacity-achieving list decodable codes with (1) local list decoding algorithms, and with (2) probabilistic near-linear time global list decoding algorithms. This also yielded constant-rate codes approaching the Gilbert-Varshamov bound with probabilistic near-linear time global unique decoding algorithms. In the current work we obtain the following results: 1) The tensor product of an efficient (poly-time) high-rate globally list recoverable code is globally list recoverable in deterministic near-linear time. This yields in turn the first capacity-achieving list decodable codes with deterministic near-linear time global list decoding algorithms. It also gives constant-rate codes approaching the Gilbert-Varshamov bound with deterministic near-linear time global unique decoding algorithms. 2) If the base code is additionally locally correctable, then the tensor product is (genuinely) locally list recoverable. This yields in turn (non-explicit) constant-rate codes approaching the Gilbert-Varshamov bound that are locally correctable with query complexity and running time No(1). This improves over prior work by Gopi et. al. (SODA'17; IEEE Transactions on Information Theory'18) that only gave query complexity NE with rate that is exponentially small in 1/ε. 3) A nearly-tight combinatori allower bound on output list size for list recovering high-rate tensor codes. This bound implies in turn a nearly-tight lower bound of NΩ(1/loglogN)on the product of query complexity and output list size for locally list recovering high-rate tensor codes.
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 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".