Round-Preserving Asymptotic Compression of Prior-Free Interactive Protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a close relationship between the communication complexity and information complexity of communication problems, as demonstrated by results such as Shannon’s noiseless source coding theorem, and the Slepian–Wolf theorem. Here, we study this relationship in the prior-free and interactive setting, where we provide an alternate proof for the result of Braverman [SIAM Review, vol. 59, no. 4, 2017], that the amortized communication complexity of simulating a prior-free interactive communication protocol, is equal to its prior-free information cost. While this is a known result, our approach addresses the need for a more natural proof of it. We also improve on the result by achieving round preservation, and using a bounded quantity of shared randomness. We do this by showing that the communicating parties can produce a reliable estimate of the joint type, or empirical distribution, of their inputs. This estimate is then used in our protocol for the prior-free reverse Shannon theorem with side information at the receiver. These results are then generalized to the interactive setting to obtain our main result.
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 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".