On List Recovery of High-Rate Tensor Codes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>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: </p><p>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.</p><p> 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 N" with rate that is exponentially small in 1/".</p><p> 3. A nearly-tight combinatorial lower bound on output list size for list recovering high-rate tensor codes. This bound implies in turn a nearly-tight lower bound of N (1/ log logN) on the product of query complexity and output list size for locally list recovering high-rate tensor codes.</p>
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".