Beyond Trace Reconstruction: Population Recovery from the Deletion Channel

Population recovery is the problem of learning an unknown distribution over an unknown set of n-bit strings, given access to independent draws from the distribution that have been independently corrupted according to some noise channel. Recent work has intensively studied such problems both for the {bit-flip} noise channel and for the erasure noise channel. In this paper we initiate the study of population recovery under the deletion channel, in which each bit b is independently deleted with some fixed probability and the surviving bits are concatenated and transmitted. This is a far more challenging noise model than bit-flip~noise or erasure noise; indeed, even the simplest case in which the population is of size 1 (corresponding to a trivial probability distribution supported on a single string) corresponds to the trace reconstruction problem, which is a challenging problem that has received much recent attention. In this work we give algorithms and lower bounds for population recovery under the deletion channel when the population size is some value ℓ > 1. As our main sample complexity upper bound, we show that for any population size ℓ = o(log n / log log n), a population of ℓ strings from {o,1}^n can be learned under deletion channel noise using 2^n^1/2+o(1) samples. On the lower bound side, we show that at least n^Ω (ℓ) samples are required to perform population recovery under the deletion channel when the population size is ℓ, for all ℓ ≤ n^1/2-ε. Our upper bounds are obtained via a robust multivariate generalization of a polynomial-based analysis, due to Krasikov and Roddity [KR97], of how the k-deck of a bit-string uniquely identifies the string; this is a very different approach from recent algorithms for trace reconstruction (the ℓ=1 case). Our lower bounds build on moment-matching results of Roos[Roos:00] and Daskalakis and Papadimitriou[DP15].

[1]  Alex D. Scott,et al.  Reconstructing sequences , 1997, Discret. Math..

[2]  Robert Brawer,et al.  The linear algebra of the pascal matrix , 1992 .

[3]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Restriction access , 2012, ITCS '12.

[4]  Sampath Kannan,et al.  More on reconstructing strings from random traces: insertions and deletions , 2005, Proceedings. International Symposium on Information Theory, 2005. ISIT 2005..

[5]  Ilia Krasikov,et al.  On a Reconstruction Problem for Sequences, , 1997, J. Comb. Theory A.

[6]  Olgica Milenkovic,et al.  Portable and Error-Free DNA-Based Data Storage , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[7]  Ananda Theertha Suresh,et al.  Sample complexity of population recovery , 2017, COLT.

[8]  Miroslav Dudík,et al.  Reconstruction from subsequences , 2003, J. Comb. Theory A.

[9]  Paul K. Stockmeyer,et al.  Reconstruction of sequences , 1991, Discret. Math..

[10]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Population recovery and partial identification , 2012, 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[11]  Tamás Erdélyi,et al.  Littlewood‐Type Problems on [0,1] , 1999 .

[12]  Yuval Peres,et al.  Subpolynomial trace reconstruction for random strings and arbitrary deletion probability , 2018, COLT.

[13]  Russell Lyons,et al.  Lower bounds for trace reconstruction , 2018, ArXiv.

[14]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Efficient Reconstruction of Sequences from Their Subsequences or Supersequences , 2001, J. Comb. Theory A.

[15]  Tero Harju,et al.  Combinatorics on Words , 2004 .

[16]  Sofya Vorotnikova,et al.  Trace Reconstruction Revisited , 2014, ESA.

[17]  Yuval Peres,et al.  Average-Case Reconstruction for the Deletion Channel: Subpolynomially Many Traces Suffice , 2017, 2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[18]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Efficient reconstruction of sequences , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[19]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  Noisy Population Recovery in Polynomial Time , 2016, 2016 IEEE 57th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[20]  Rina Panigrahy,et al.  Trace reconstruction with constant deletion probability and related results , 2008, SODA '08.

[21]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  A Polynomial Time Algorithm for Lossy Population Recovery , 2013, 2013 IEEE 54th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[22]  Shachar Lovett,et al.  Improved Noisy Population Recovery, and Reverse Bonami-Beckner Inequality for Sparse Functions , 2014, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[23]  Rocco A. Servedio,et al.  Learning Poisson Binomial Distributions , 2011, STOC '12.

[24]  Yuval Peres,et al.  Trace reconstruction with exp(O(n1/3)) samples , 2017, STOC.

[25]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Optimal mean-based algorithms for trace reconstruction , 2017, STOC.

[26]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Finding Heavy Hitters from Lossy or Noisy Data , 2013, APPROX-RANDOM.

[27]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Sparse covers for sums of indicators , 2013, ArXiv.

[28]  Yuval Peres,et al.  Trace reconstruction with varying deletion probabilities , 2018, ANALCO.

[29]  Cyrus Rashtchian,et al.  Random access in large-scale DNA data storage , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[30]  Sampath Kannan,et al.  Reconstructing strings from random traces , 2004, SODA '04.

[31]  B. Roos Binomial Approximation to the Poisson Binomial Distribution: The Krawtchouk Expansion , 2001 .

[32]  Krishnamurthy Viswanathan,et al.  Improved string reconstruction over insertion-deletion channels , 2008, SODA '08.

[33]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Sharp bounds for population recovery , 2017, ArXiv.