Lune

FOCS2020Top-tier venue

Binary Interactive Error Resilience Beyond 1 ⁣/ ⁣8{{}^{1}}\!/\!_{8} (or why (1 ⁣/ ⁣2)3>1 ⁣/ ⁣8)({{}^{1}}\!/\!_{2})^{3} > {{}^{1}}\!/\!_{8})

Klim Efremenko, Gillat Kol, Raghuvansh R. Saxena

2020Year
4Citations
3Top-tier citations

Abstract

Interactive error correcting codesInteractive error correcting codes are codes that encode a two party communication protocol to an error-resilient protocol that succeeds even if a constant fraction of the communicated symbols are adversarially corrupted, at the cost of increasing the communication by a constant factor. What is the largest fraction of corruptions that such codes can protect against? If the error-resilient protocol is allowed to communicate large (constant sized) symbols, Braverman and Rao (STOC, 2011) show that the maximum rate of corruptions that can be tolerated is1/4. They also give a binary interactive error correcting protocol that only communicates bits and is resilient to1/2 fraction of errors, but leave the optimality of this scheme as an open problem. We answer this question in the negative, breaking the1/8 barrier. Specifically, we give a binary interactive error correcting scheme that is resilient to5/39 >1/8 fraction of adversarial errors. Our scheme builds upon a novel construction of binary list-decodable interactive codes with small list size.

Ask about this paper

Ask your agent about it.

Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.

Questions to start from

Your agent calls

Lunesearch_papers

Ask in Lune

Free to start. No credit card required.

lune papers get af6be3ad-216c-4717-9b30-df0a0d3ea29c

Cited by top-tier papers3

Ask how each one uses it

Related papers

Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines