Correlation testing for affine invariant properties on n pin the high error regime?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently there has been much interest in Gowers uniformity norms from the perspective of theoretical computer science. This is mainly due to the fact that these norms provide a method for testing whether the maximum correlation of a function f : n p → F p with polynomials of degree at most d ≤ p is nonnegligible, while making only a constant number of queries to the function. This is an instance of correlation testing . In this framework, a fixed test is applied to a function, and the acceptance probability of the test is dependent on the correlation of the function from the property. This is an analogue of proximity oblivious testing, a notion coined by Goldreich and Ron, in the high error regime. In this work, we study general properties which are affine invariant and which are correlation testable using a constant number of queries. We show that any such property (as long as the field size is not too small) can in fact be tested by Gowers uniformity tests, and hence having correlation with the property is equivalent to having correlation with degree d polynomials for some fixed d. We stress that our result holds also for nonlinear properties which are affine invariant. This completely classifies affine invariant properties which are correlation testable. The proof is based on higher-order Fourier analysis. Another ingredient is a nontrivial extension of a graph theoretical theorem of Erd̈os, Lov́asz, and Spencer to the context of additive number theory. © 2014 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
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 | 0.010 | 0.098 |
| 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 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".