Local list-decoding and testing of random linear codes from high error

In this paper, we give surprisingly efficient algorithms for list-decoding and testing random linear codes. Our main result is that random sparse linear codes are locally list-decodable and locally testable in the high-error regime with only a constant number of queries. More precisely, we show that for all constants c> 0 and γ > 0, and for every linear code C ⊆ 0,1N which is: sparse: |C| ≤ Nc, and unbiased: each nonzero codeword in C has weight in (1/2 - N-γ, 1/2 + N-γ), C is locally testable and locally list-decodable from (1/2 - ε)-fraction worst-case errors using only poly(1/ε) queries to a received word. We also give subexponential time algorithms for list-decoding arbitrary unbiased (but not necessarily sparse) linear codes in the high-error regime. In particular, this yields the first subexponential time algorithm even for the problem of (unique) decoding random linear codes of inverse-polynomial rate from a fixed positive fraction of errors. Earlier, Kaufman and Sudan had shown that sparse, unbiased codes can be locally (unique) decoded and locally tested from a constant fraction of errors, where this constant fraction tends to 0 as the number of codewords grows. Our results significantly strengthen their results, while also having significantly simpler proofs. At the heart of our algorithms is a natural "self-correcting" operation defined on codes and received words. This self-correcting operation transforms a code C with a received word w into a simpler code C' and a related received word w', such that w is close to C if and only if w' is close to C'. Starting with a sparse, unbiased code C and an arbitrary received word w, a constant number of applications of the self-correcting operation reduces us to the case of local list-decoding and testing for the Hadamard code, for which the well known algorithms of Goldreich-Levin and Blum-Luby-Rubinfeld are available. This yields the constant-query local algorithms for the original code C. Our algorithm for decoding unbiased linear codes in subexponential time proceeds similarly. Applying the self-correcting operation to an unbiased code C and an arbitrary received word a super-constant number of times, we get reduced to the problem of learning noisy parities, for which non-trivial subexponential time algorithms were recently given by Blum-Kalai-Wasserman and Feldman-Gopalan-Khot-Ponnuswami. Our result generalizes a result of Lyubashevsky, which gave a subexponential time algorithm for decoding random linear codes of inverse-polynomial rate from random errors.

[1]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Learning polynomials with queries: The highly noisy case , 1995, Proceedings of IEEE 36th Annual Foundations of Computer Science.

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

[3]  Cynthia Dwork,et al.  Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, May 17-20, 2008 , 2008, STOC.

[4]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Linearity testing in characteristic two , 1996, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

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

[6]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Pseudorandom generators without the XOR Lemma (extended abstract) , 1999, STOC '99.

[7]  Harald Niederreiter,et al.  Introduction to finite fields and their applications: List of Symbols , 1986 .

[8]  Ran Raz,et al.  A sub-constant error-probability low-degree test, and a sub-constant error-probability PCP characterization of NP , 1997, STOC '97.

[9]  Irit Dinur,et al.  Locally Testing Direct Product in the Low Error Range , 2008, 2008 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[10]  Simon Litsyn,et al.  On spectra of BCH codes , 1995, Eighteenth Convention of Electrical and Electronics Engineers in Israel.

[11]  Simon Litsyn,et al.  Almost orthogonal linear codes are locally testable , 2005, 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'05).

[12]  Ran Raz,et al.  Sub-constant error low degree test of almost-linear size , 2006, STOC '06.

[13]  Shubhangi Saraf,et al.  Tolerant Linearity Testing and Locally Testable Codes , 2009, APPROX-RANDOM.

[14]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Uniform direct product theorems: simplified, optimized, and derandomized , 2008, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Robust Characterizations of Polynomials with Applications to Program Testing , 1996, SIAM J. Comput..

[16]  Atri Rudra,et al.  Testing low-degree polynomials over prime fields , 2004, 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[17]  Madhu Sudan List decoding: algorithms and applications , 2000, SIGA.

[18]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Tolerant property testing and distance approximation , 2006, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[19]  Vadim Lyubashevsky,et al.  The Parity Problem in the Presence of Noise, Decoding Random Linear Codes, and the Subset Sum Problem , 2005, APPROX-RANDOM.

[20]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  New direct-product testers and 2-query PCPs , 2009, STOC '09.

[21]  Noga Alon,et al.  Testing Low-Degree Polynomials over GF(2( , 2003, RANDOM-APPROX.

[22]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Sparse Random Linear Codes are Locally Decodable and Testable , 2007, 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'07).

[23]  Eyal Kushilevitz,et al.  PAC learning with nasty noise , 1999, Theor. Comput. Sci..

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

[25]  Alex Samorodnitsky,et al.  Low-degree tests at large distances , 2006, STOC '07.

[26]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Pseudorandom generators without the XOR Lemma , 1999, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[27]  Leonid A. Levin,et al.  A hard-core predicate for all one-way functions , 1989, STOC '89.

[28]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Improved Low-Degree Testing and its Applications , 1997, STOC '97.

[29]  Dana Ron,et al.  Testing polynomials over general fields , 2004, 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[30]  Rafail Ostrovsky,et al.  Fuzzy Extractors: How to Generate Strong Keys from Biometrics and Other Noisy Data , 2004, SIAM J. Comput..

[31]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems , 1998, JACM.

[32]  Vitaly Feldman,et al.  New Results for Learning Noisy Parities and Halfspaces , 2006, 2006 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'06).

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

[34]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  P = BPP if E requires exponential circuits: derandomizing the XOR lemma , 1997, STOC '97.