7
$\begingroup$

I am reading the proof from here and found a technical lemma that seems to be incorrect (its proof is short and very vague). I know this is rather specific and the context is problematic, but I couldn't figure it out myself.

In page 67 (when proving a claim that is used for soundness of local decoding of low degree polynomials procedure), the writers use a "fact" A.9 (regarding "Well Distribution Lemma in Curves") that is located in page 156.

The proof is very short and I cannot grasp it.

Moreover, the statement seems to be incorrect by the following example:

Let $S=\{x_1\}$, then $\forall$ curve $C\in P(\langle x_1,\dots,x_k\rangle)$ we have $|C\cap S|\geq 1$ as $C$ is a multiset, so $$\mathbb{E}\left[\frac{|C\cap S|}{|C|}\right]\geq\mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{|C|}\right]>\frac{1}{|\mathbb{F}|^m}=\frac{|S|}{|\mathbb{F}|^m}$$ Maybe, I miss something in the statement of the lemma...

I will appreciate any help in understanding this problem.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @A.2 So, how is it later combined with the averaging principle? I mean, how does your statement helps in proving the claim in page 67? And do u understand the proof for it? $\endgroup$ – Don Fanucci Mar 18 at 17:58
  • $\begingroup$ @A.2 The lemma in question is explicitly stated in terms of "the average of $|C\cap S|$, among all curves $C\in P(\langle x_1,\dot, x_k\rangle)$" (emphasis mine), not probabilities, though. $\endgroup$ – Clement C. Mar 18 at 23:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @A.2 Thanks! If you upload your comments as an answer, I will accept it. $\endgroup$ – Don Fanucci Mar 20 at 5:49
5
$\begingroup$

Notation: Let $P(\langle x_1,\dots,x_k\rangle)$ the set of degree $k$ curves that evaluates to $x_1,\dots,x_k\in\mathbb{F}^m$ at the first $k$ field elements in $\mathbb{F}$ and we will use just $P$ as a shorthand for this set. Let $S$ be any subset of $ \mathbb{F}^m$. Below, we assume that multiplicity is taken into account when set cardinalities are computed and for any curve $C\in P$, $|C|:=|\{C(i) : k+1<i\leq \mathbb{F} \}|$.

Claim 1: $\mathbb{E}_{C}\big[ \frac{|C\cap S|}{|C|} \big]=\frac{|S|}{|\mathbb{F}|^m}$ where $C$ is a random curve in $P$.

Proof: $\mathbb{E}_{C}\big[ \frac{|C\cap S|}{|C|} \big]=\sum_{C'\in P}\Pr_{C}\big[C=C' \big]\cdot\Pr_{i}\big[C'(i) \in S\big]= \Pr_{C,i} \big[C(i)\in S \big]= \frac{|S|}{|F|^m} $

Here $C$ is a random curve in $P$ and $i$ is randomly sampled from $\{k+1,\dots,\mathbb{F} \}$. The last line holds because sampling a random curve from $P$ and then evaluating the curve at a random $i$ gives a random element from $\mathbb{F}^m$. To see why this is true consider the bipartite graph on $P\cup \mathbb{F}^m$ where for each $i\in \{k+1,\dots,\mathbb{F}\}$, each curve $C\in P$ has a neighbor $C(i)\in \mathbb{F}^m$. Its easy to check that this is a bi-regular graph. Thus, the distribution that samples a random $C$ and outputs a random neighbor $C(i)\in \mathbb{F}^m$ , is same as the distribution that randomly outputs an element from $\mathbb{F}^m$. The claim follows.

Remark 1: Claim 1 implies that if $|S|/|\mathbb{F}|^m\leq \delta$ then we must have $\Pr_{c}[\Pr_{i}[~c(i)\in \mathcal{S}] > \sqrt\delta] \leq \sqrt{\delta}$. This I believe is the claim (from the linked thesis) that OP refers to.

Remark 2: What happens if we just sample a random point $i$ from the entire field $\mathbb{F}$ instead of $\{k+1,\dots,\mathbb{F} \}$. Nothing will change much as it will incur a small(if $k\ll |\mathbb{F}|$) additive error of $k/|\mathbb{F}|$. In [1] below this error is there in the argument in page 38.

[1] https://madhu.seas.harvard.edu/papers/1997/arora-journ.pdf

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot, it clarified the argument in a very nice way! $\endgroup$ – Don Fanucci Mar 22 at 9:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.