Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 52 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 47 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 18 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 13 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 100 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 192 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 454 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Trace Reconstruction: Generalized and Parameterized (1904.09618v2)

Published 21 Apr 2019 in cs.DS, cs.IT, and math.IT

Abstract: In the beautifully simple-to-state problem of trace reconstruction, the goal is to reconstruct an unknown binary string $x$ given random "traces" of $x$ where each trace is generated by deleting each coordinate of $x$ independently with probability $p<1$. The problem is well studied both when the unknown string is arbitrary and when it is chosen uniformly at random. For both settings, there is still an exponential gap between upper and lower sample complexity bounds and our understanding of the problem is still surprisingly limited. In this paper, we consider natural parameterizations and generalizations of this problem in an effort to attain a deeper and more comprehensive understanding. We prove that $\exp(O(n{1/4} \sqrt{\log n}))$ traces suffice for reconstructing arbitrary matrices. In the matrix version of the problem, each row and column of an unknown $\sqrt{n}\times \sqrt{n}$ matrix is deleted independently with probability $p$. Our results contrasts with the best known results for sequence reconstruction where the best known upper bound is $\exp(O(n{1/3}))$. An optimal result for random matrix reconstruction: we show that $\Theta(\log n)$ traces are necessary and sufficient. This is in contrast to the problem for random sequences where there is a super-logarithmic lower bound and the best known upper bound is $\exp({O}(\log{1/3} n))$. We show that $\exp(O(k{1/3}\log{2/3} n))$ traces suffice to reconstruct $k$-sparse strings, providing an improvement over the best known sequence reconstruction results when $k = o(n/\log2 n)$. We show that $\textrm{poly}(n)$ traces suffice if $x$ is $k$-sparse and we additionally have a "separation" promise, specifically that the indices of 1's in $x$ all differ by $\Omega(k \log n)$.

Citations (47)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com