Locally testable codes and PCPs of almost-linear length

Locally testable codes are error-correcting codes that admit very efficient codeword tests. Specifically, using a constant number of (random) queries, noncodewords are rejected with probability proportional to their distance from the code. Locally testable codes are believed to be the combinatorial core of PCPs. However, the relation is less immediate than commonly believed. Nevertheless, we show that certain PCP systems can be modified to yield locally testable codes. On the other hand, we adapt techniques we develop for the construction of the latter to yield new PCPs. Our main results are locally testable codes and PCPs of almost-linear length. Specifically, we present: 1. Locally testable (linear) codes in which k information bits are encoded by a codeword of length approximately k /spl middot/ exp(/spl radic/(log)). This improves over previous results that either yield codewords of exponential length or obtained almost quadratic length codewords for sufficiently large non-binary alphabet. 2. PCP systems of almost-linear length for SAT. The length of the proof is approximately n /spl middot/ exp(/spl radic/(log n)) and verification in performed by a constant number (i.e., 19) of queries, as opposed to previous results that used proof length n/sup 1+O(1/q)/ for verification by q queries. The novel techniques in use include a random projection of certain codewords and PCP-oracles, an adaptation of PCP constructions to obtain "linear PCP-oracles" for proving conjunctions of linear conditions, and a direct construction of locally testable (linear) codes of sub-exponential length.

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

[2]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Lower bounds for linear locally decodable codes and private information retrieval , 2002, Proceedings 17th IEEE Annual Conference on Computational Complexity.

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

[4]  Jonathan Katz,et al.  On the efficiency of local decoding procedures for error-correcting codes , 2000, STOC '00.

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

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

[7]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Small PCPs with Low Query Complexity , 2001, STACS.

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

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

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

[11]  Dana Ron,et al.  Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation , 1998, JACM.

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

[13]  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.

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

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

[16]  Sanjeev Khanna,et al.  Complexity classifications of Boolean constraint satisfaction problems , 2001, SIAM monographs on discrete mathematics and applications.

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