Randomized Communication and Implicit Representations for Matrices and Graphs of Small Sign-Rank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We prove a characterization of the structural conditions on matrices of sign-rank 3 and unit disk graphs (UDGs) which permit constant-cost public-coin randomized communication protocols. Therefore, under these conditions, these graphs also admit implicit representations. The sign-rank of a matrix $M \in \{\pm 1\}^{N \times N}$ is the smallest rank of a matrix $R$ such that $M_{i,j} = \mathrm{sign}(R_{i,j})$ for all $i,j \in [N]$; equivalently, it is the smallest dimension $d$ in which $M$ can be represented as a point-halfspace incidence matrix with halfspaces through the origin, and it is essentially equivalent to the unbounded-error communication complexity. Matrices of sign-rank 3 can achieve the maximum possible bounded-error randomized communication complexity $Θ(\log N)$, and meanwhile the existence of implicit representations for graphs of bounded sign-rank (including UDGs, which have sign-rank 4) has been open since at least 2003. We prove that matrices of sign-rank 3, and UDGs, have constant randomized communication complexity if and only if they do not encode arbitrarily large instances of the Greater-Than communication problem, or, equivalently, if they do not contain arbitrarily large half-graphs as semi-induced subgraphs. This also establishes the existence of implicit representations for these graphs under the same conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".