Bibliographic record
Abstract
$ \newcommand{\colored}{} \newcommand{\codedist}{\colored{d}} \newcommand{\blocklength}{\colored{n}} \newcommand{\poly}{\operatorname{poly}} $ Many low-degree tests examine the input function via its restrictions to random hyperplanes of a certain dimension. Examples include the line-vs-line (Arora, Sudan 2003), plane-vs-plane (Raz, Safra 1997), and cube-vs-cube (Bhangale, Dinur, Navon 2017) tests. In this paper we study tests that only consider restrictions along axis-parallel hyperplanes, which have been studied by Polishchuk and Spielman (1994) and Ben-Sasson and Sudan (2006). While such tests are necessarily “weaker,” they work for a more general class of codes, namely tensor product codes. Moreover, axis-parallel tests play a key role in constructing LTCs with inverse polylogarithmic rate and short PCPs (Polishchuk, Spielman 1994; Ben-Sasson, Sudan 2008; Meir 2010). We present two results on axis-parallel tests. (1) Bivariate low-degree testing with low agreement. We prove an analogue of the Bivariate Low-Degree Testing Theorem of Polishchuk and Spielman in the low-agreement regime, albeit for much larger fields. Namely, for the tensor product of the Reed--Solomon code with itself, we prove that for sufficiently large fields, the $2$-query variant of the axis-parallel line test (row-vs-column test) works for arbitrarily small agreement. Prior analyses of axis-parallel tests assumed high agreement, and no results for such tests in the low-agreement regime were known. Our proof technique deviates significantly from that of Polishchuk and Spielman, which relies on algebraic methods such as Bézout's Theorem, and instead leverages a fundamental result in extremal graph theory by Kővári, Sós, and Turán. To our knowledge, this is the first time this result is used in the context of low-degree testing. (2) Improved robustness for tensor product codes. Robustness is a strengthening of local testability that underlies many applications. We prove that the axis-parallel hyperplane test for the $m$-th tensor power of a linear code with block length $\blocklength$ and distance $\codedist$ is $\Omega(\frac{\codedist^m}{\blocklength^m})$-robust. This improves on a theorem of Viderman (2012) by a factor of $1/\poly(m)$. While the improvement is not large, we believe that our proof is a notable simplification compared to prior work. ------------ A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the 21st International Workshop on Randomization and Computation (RANDOM'17).
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 | 0.004 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
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".