Linearity testing in characteristic two

Let Dist(f,g)=Pr/sub u/[f(u)/spl ne/g(u)] denote the relative distance between functions f,g mapping from a group G to a group H, and let Dist(f) denote the minimum, over all linear functions (homomorphisms) g, of Dist(f,g). Given a function f:G/spl rarr/H we let Err(f)=Pr/sub u,/spl upsi//[f(u)+f(/spl upsi/)/spl ne/f(u+/spl upsi/)] denote the rejection probability of the Blum-Luby-Rubinfeld (1993) linearity test. Linearity testing is the study of the relationship between Err(f) and Dist(f), and in particular lower bounds on Err(f) in terms of Dist(f). We discuss when the underlying groups are G=GF(2)/sup n/ and H=GF(2). In this case, the collection of linear functions describe a Hadamard code of block length 2/sup n/ and for an arbitrary function f mapping GF(2)/sup n/ to GF(2) the distance Dist(l) measures its distance to a Hadamard code. Err(f) is a parameter that is "easy to measure" and linearity testing studies the relationship of this parameter to the distance of f. The code and corresponding test are used in the construction of efficient probabilistically checkable proofs and thence in the derivation of hardness of approximation. Improved analyses translate into better nonapproximability results. We present a description of the relationship between Err(f) and Dist(f) which is nearly complete in all its aspects, and entirely complete in some. We present functions L,U:[0,1]/spl rarr/[0,1] such that for all x /spl isin/ [0,1] we have L(x)/spl les/Err(f)/spl les/U(x) whenever Dist(f)=x, with the upper bound being tight on the whole range, and the lower bound tight on a large part of the range and close on the rest. Part of our strengthening is obtained by showing a new connection between linearity testing and Fourier analysis.

[1]  Daniel A. Spielman,et al.  Nearly-linear size holographic proofs , 1994, STOC '94.

[2]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Some improvements to total degree tests , 1995, Proceedings Third Israel Symposium on the Theory of Computing and Systems.

[3]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Improved non-approximability results , 1994, STOC '94.

[4]  Johan Håstad Testing of the long code and hardness for clique , 1996, STOC '96.

[5]  F. MacWilliams,et al.  The Theory of Error-Correcting Codes , 1977 .

[6]  Leonid A. Levin,et al.  Checking computations in polylogarithmic time , 1991, STOC '91.

[7]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols , 2005, computational complexity.

[8]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and hardness of approximation problems , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[9]  N. S. Barnett,et al.  Private communication , 1969 .

[10]  M. Sudan,et al.  Robust Characterizations of Polynomials and Their Applications to Program Testing , 1993 .

[11]  Marcos A. Kiwi,et al.  Probabilistically checkable proofs and the testing of hadamard-like codes , 1996 .

[12]  László Lovász,et al.  Approximating clique is almost NP-complete , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[13]  Noga Alon,et al.  The Probabilistic Method , 2015, Fundamentals of Ramsey Theory.

[14]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and the intractability of approximation problems , 1992, FOCS 1992.

[15]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Efficient probabilistically checkable proofs and applications to approximations , 1993, STOC.

[16]  O. Antoine,et al.  Theory of Error-correcting Codes , 2022 .

[17]  M. Bellare,et al.  Efficient probabilistic checkable proofs and applications to approximation , 1994, STOC '94.

[18]  Manuel Blum,et al.  Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems , 1990, STOC '90.

[19]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Probabilistic checking of proofs: a new characterization of NP , 1998, JACM.

[20]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Self-testing/correcting for polynomials and for approximate functions , 1991, STOC '91.