New Lower Bounds in Merlin-Arthur Communication and Graph Streaming Verification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present novel lower bounds in the Merlin-Arthur (MA) communication model and the related annotated streaming or stream verification model. The MA communication model extends the classical communication model by introducing an all-powerful but untrusted player, Merlin, who knows the inputs of the usual players, Alice and Bob, and attempts to convince them about the output. We focus on the online MA (OMA) model where Alice and Merlin each send a single message to Bob, who needs to catch Merlin if he is dishonest and announce the correct output otherwise. Most known functions have OMA protocols with total communication significantly smaller than what would be needed without Merlin. In this work, we introduce the notion of non-trivial-OMA complexity of a function. This is the minimum total communication required when we restrict ourselves to only non-trivial protocols where Alice sends Bob fewer bits than what she would have sent without Merlin. We exhibit the first explicit functions that have this complexity superlinear - even exponential - in their classical one-way complexity: this means the trivial protocol, where Merlin communicates nothing and Alice and Bob compute the function on their own, is exponentially better than any non-trivial protocol in terms of total communication. These OMA lower bounds also translate to the annotated streaming model, the MA analogue of single-pass data streaming. We show large separations between the classical streaming complexity and the non-trivial annotated streaming complexity (for the analogous notion in this setting) of fundamental problems such as counting distinct items, as well as of graph problems such as connectivity and k-connectivity in a certain edge update model called the support graph turnstile model that we introduce here.
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 | 0.008 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".