2-Transitivity is Insufficient for Local Testability

A basic goal in property testing is to identify a minimal set of features that make a property testable. For the case when the property to be tested is membership in a binary linear error-correcting code, Alon et al. (Trans Inf Theory, 51(11):4032–4039, 2005) had conjectured that the presence of a single low-weight codeword in the dual, and “2-transitivity” of the code (i.e., the code being invariant under a 2-transitive group of permutations on the coordinates of the code) suffice to get local testability. We refute this conjecture by giving a family of error-correcting codes where the coordinates of the codewords form a large field of characteristic two, and the code is invariant under affine transformations of the domain. This class of properties was introduced by Kaufman & Sudan (STOC, 2008) as a setting where many results in algebraic property testing generalize. Our result shows a complementary virtue: This family also can be useful in producing counterexamples to natural conjectures.

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

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

[3]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Nondeterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols , 1990, Proceedings [1990] 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[4]  Jon Kleinberg,et al.  Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Seattle, WA, USA, May 21-23, 2006 , 2006, Symposium on the Theory of Computing.

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

[6]  Eli Ben-Sasson,et al.  Some 3CNF properties are hard to test , 2003, STOC '03.

[7]  GoldreichOded,et al.  Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation , 1998 .

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

[9]  László Lovász,et al.  Graph limits and parameter testing , 2006, STOC '06.

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

[11]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols , 1992, computational complexity.

[12]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Algebraic property testing: the role of invariance , 2008, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[13]  Noga Alon,et al.  Testing Reed-Muller codes , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

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

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

[16]  Dana Ron,et al.  Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation , 1996, Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science.

[17]  Noga Alon,et al.  A combinatorial characterization of the testable graph properties: it's all about regularity , 2006, STOC '06.

[18]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Succinct Representation of Codes with Applications to Testing , 2009, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

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

[20]  László Lovász,et al.  Interactive proofs and the hardness of approximating cliques , 1996, JACM.

[21]  Elena Grigorescu.  Symmetries in algebraic Property Testing , 2010 .

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