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 49 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 53 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 16 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 172 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 472 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 39 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Efficient Linear and Affine Codes for Correcting Insertions/Deletions (2007.09075v4)

Published 17 Jul 2020 in cs.IT, cs.DM, cs.DS, math.CO, and math.IT

Abstract: This paper studies \emph{linear} and \emph{affine} error-correcting codes for correcting synchronization errors such as insertions and deletions. We call such codes linear/affine insdel codes. Linear codes that can correct even a single deletion are limited to have information rate at most $1/2$ (achieved by the trivial 2-fold repetition code). Previously, it was (erroneously) reported that more generally no non-trivial linear codes correcting $k$ deletions exist, i.e., that the $(k+1)$-fold repetition codes and its rate of $1/(k+1)$ are basically optimal for any $k$. We disprove this and show the existence of binary linear codes of length $n$ and rate just below $1/2$ capable of correcting $\Omega(n)$ insertions and deletions. This identifies rate $1/2$ as a sharp threshold for recovery from deletions for linear codes, and reopens the quest for a better understanding of the capabilities of linear codes for correcting insertions/deletions. We prove novel outer bounds and existential inner bounds for the rate vs. (edit) distance trade-off of linear insdel codes. We complement our existential results with an efficient synchronization-string-based transformation that converts any asymptotically-good linear code for Hamming errors into an asymptotically-good linear code for insdel errors. Lastly, we show that the $\frac{1}{2}$-rate limitation does not hold for affine codes by giving an explicit affine code of rate $1-\epsilon$ which can efficiently correct a constant fraction of insdel errors.

Citations (27)

Summary

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

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

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

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

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