Optimal error rates for interactive coding I: adaptivity and other settings

M. Ghaffari, Bernhard Haeupler, M. Sudan
{"title":"Optimal error rates for interactive coding I: adaptivity and other settings","authors":"M. Ghaffari, Bernhard Haeupler, M. Sudan","doi":"10.1145/2591796.2591872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We consider the task of interactive communication in the presence of adversarial errors and present tight bounds on the tolerable error-rates in a number of different settings. Most significantly, we explore adaptive interactive communication where the communicating parties decide who should speak next based on the history of the interaction. In particular, this decision can depend on estimates of the amount of errors that have occurred so far. Braverman and Rao [STOC'11] show that non-adaptively one can code for any constant error rate below 1/4 but not more. They asked whether this bound could be improved using adaptivity. We answer this open question in the affirmative (with a slightly different collection of resources): Our adaptive coding scheme tolerates any error rate below 2/7 and we show that tolerating a higher error rate is impossible. We also show that in the setting of Franklin et al. [CRYPTO'13], where parties share randomness not known to the adversary, adaptivity increases the tolerable error rate from 1/2 to 2/3. For list-decodable interactive communications, where each party outputs a constant size list of possible outcomes, the tight tolerable error rate is 1/2. Our negative results hold even if the communication and computation are unbounded, whereas for our positive results communication and computations are polynomially bounded. Most prior work considered coding schemes with linear communication bounds, while allowing unbounded computations. We argue that studying tolerable error rates in this relaxed context helps to identify a setting's intrinsic optimal error rate. We set forward a strong working hypothesis which stipulates that for any setting the maximum tolerable error rate is independent of many computational and communication complexity measures. We believe this hypothesis to be a powerful guideline for the design of simple, natural, and efficient coding schemes and for understanding the (im)possibilities of coding for interactive communications.","PeriodicalId":123501,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"74","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2591796.2591872","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 74

Abstract

We consider the task of interactive communication in the presence of adversarial errors and present tight bounds on the tolerable error-rates in a number of different settings. Most significantly, we explore adaptive interactive communication where the communicating parties decide who should speak next based on the history of the interaction. In particular, this decision can depend on estimates of the amount of errors that have occurred so far. Braverman and Rao [STOC'11] show that non-adaptively one can code for any constant error rate below 1/4 but not more. They asked whether this bound could be improved using adaptivity. We answer this open question in the affirmative (with a slightly different collection of resources): Our adaptive coding scheme tolerates any error rate below 2/7 and we show that tolerating a higher error rate is impossible. We also show that in the setting of Franklin et al. [CRYPTO'13], where parties share randomness not known to the adversary, adaptivity increases the tolerable error rate from 1/2 to 2/3. For list-decodable interactive communications, where each party outputs a constant size list of possible outcomes, the tight tolerable error rate is 1/2. Our negative results hold even if the communication and computation are unbounded, whereas for our positive results communication and computations are polynomially bounded. Most prior work considered coding schemes with linear communication bounds, while allowing unbounded computations. We argue that studying tolerable error rates in this relaxed context helps to identify a setting's intrinsic optimal error rate. We set forward a strong working hypothesis which stipulates that for any setting the maximum tolerable error rate is independent of many computational and communication complexity measures. We believe this hypothesis to be a powerful guideline for the design of simple, natural, and efficient coding schemes and for understanding the (im)possibilities of coding for interactive communications.
交互编码的最佳错误率I:适应性和其他设置
我们考虑了存在对抗性错误的交互通信任务,并在许多不同的设置中给出了可容忍错误率的严格界限。最重要的是,我们探索了自适应互动交流,在这种交流中,交流双方根据互动的历史来决定谁应该下一个发言。特别是,该决策可能依赖于对迄今为止发生的错误数量的估计。Braverman和Rao [STOC'11]表明,非自适应编码可以对低于1/4但不大于1/4的任意常数错误率进行编码。他们询问是否可以利用适应性来改善这一界限。我们肯定地回答了这个开放的问题(使用略微不同的资源集合):我们的自适应编码方案允许任何低于2/7的错误率,并且我们表明容忍更高的错误率是不可能的。我们还表明,在Franklin等人[CRYPTO'13]的设置中,各方共享对手不知道的随机性,适应性将可容忍错误率从1/2增加到2/3。对于列表可解码的交互通信,其中每一方输出一个固定大小的可能结果列表,严格的可容忍错误率为1/2。即使通信和计算是无界的,我们的负结果也成立,而对于我们的正结果,通信和计算是多项式有界的。大多数先前的工作考虑具有线性通信边界的编码方案,同时允许无界计算。我们认为,在这种宽松的环境中研究可容忍错误率有助于确定设置的内在最佳错误率。我们提出了一个强有力的工作假设,该假设规定对于任何设置,最大可容忍错误率与许多计算和通信复杂性度量无关。我们相信这一假设对于设计简单、自然和高效的编码方案以及理解交互通信编码的可能性是一个强有力的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书