Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and 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 134 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 33 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 30 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 86 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 173 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 438 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Zero-Rate Thresholds and New Capacity Bounds for List-Decoding and List-Recovery (2210.07754v1)

Published 14 Oct 2022 in cs.IT, cs.CC, math.CO, and math.IT

Abstract: In this work we consider the list-decodability and list-recoverability of arbitrary $q$-ary codes, for all integer values of $q\geq 2$. A code is called $(p,L)q$-list-decodable if every radius $pn$ Hamming ball contains less than $L$ codewords; $(p,\ell,L)_q$-list-recoverability is a generalization where we place radius $pn$ Hamming balls on every point of a combinatorial rectangle with side length $\ell$ and again stipulate that there be less than $L$ codewords. Our main contribution is to precisely calculate the maximum value of $p$ for which there exist infinite families of positive rate $(p,\ell,L)_q$-list-recoverable codes, the quantity we call the zero-rate threshold. Denoting this value by $p$, we in fact show that codes correcting a $p_+\varepsilon$ fraction of errors must have size $O_{\varepsilon}(1)$, i.e., independent of $n$. Such a result is typically referred to as a ``Plotkin bound.'' To complement this, a standard random code with expurgation construction shows that there exist positive rate codes correcting a $p_*-\varepsilon$ fraction of errors. We also follow a classical proof template (typically attributed to Elias and Bassalygo) to derive from the zero-rate threshold other tradeoffs between rate and decoding radius for list-decoding and list-recovery. Technically, proving the Plotkin bound boils down to demonstrating the Schur convexity of a certain function defined on the $q$-simplex as well as the convexity of a univariate function derived from it. We remark that an earlier argument claimed similar results for $q$-ary list-decoding; however, we point out that this earlier proof is flawed.

Citations (2)

Summary

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

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

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions 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.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube