Computational Complexity in Property Testing
Renato Ferreira Pinto Jr., Diptaksho Palit, Sofya Raskhodnikova
Abstract
We initiate a systematic study of the computational complexity of property testing, focusing on the relationship between query and time complexity. While traditional work in property testing has emphasized query complexity-often via information-theoretic techniques-relatively little is known about the computational hardness of property testers. Our goal is to chart the landscape of time-query interplay and develop tools for proving time complexity lower bounds. Our first contribution is a pair of time-query hierarchy theorems for property testing. For all suitable nondecreasing functions q(n) and t(n) with t(n) ≥ q(n), we construct properties with query complexity Θ(q(n)) and time complexity Ω(t(n)). Our weak hierarchy holds unconditionally, whereas the strong version-assuming the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis-provides better control over the time complexity of the constructed properties.
We then turn to halfspaces in R d , a fundamental class in property testing and learning theory. We study the problem of approximating the distance from the input function to the nearest halfspace within additive error ε. (The distance approximation problem is known to have roughly the same complexity as tolerant property testing for appropriate setting of parameters.) For the distribution-free distance approximation problem, known algorithms achieve query complexity O(d/ε 2 ), but run in time Θ(1/ε d ). We provide a fine-grained justification for this gap: assuming the (integer) k-SUM conjecture, any algorithm must have running time (1/ε) ⌈(d+1)/2⌉-o(1) . This fine-grained lower bound yields a provable (under a well-established assumption) separation between query and time complexity for a natural and well-studied (tolerant) testing problem. We also prove that any randomized Statistical Query (SQ) algorithm under the standard Gaussian distribution requires (1/ε) Ω(d) queries if the queries are answered with additive error up to ε Ω(d) , revealing a fundamental barrier even in the distribution-specific setting.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext bca62c3a-674c-4040-a5de-ba684a2426cbBuilds on17
- Near-Optimal SQ Lower Bounds for Agnostically Learning Halfspaces and ReLUs under Gaussian MarginalsIlias Diakonikolas, Daniel Kane, Nikos ZarifisNeurIPS 2020 · 80 citations
- Near-Optimal Cryptographic Hardness of Agnostically Learning Halfspaces and ReLU Regression under Gaussian MarginalsIlias Diakonikolas, Daniel Kane, Lisheng RenICML 2023 · 40 citations
- An Efficient Tester-Learner for HalfspacesAravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans, Konstantinos Stavropoulos, Arsen VasilyanICLR 2024 · 16 citations
- Testing Graph Properties with the Container MethodEric Blais, Cameron SethFOCS 2023 · 11 citations
- Explicit Two-Sided Vertex Expanders beyond the Spectral BarrierJun-Ting Hsieh, Ting-Chun Lin, Sidhanth Mohanty, Ryan O'Donnell et al.STOC 2025 · 8 citations
Related papers
- Near-Optimal Bounds for Learning Gaussian Halfspaces with Random Classification NoiseIlias Diakonikolas, Jelena Diakonikolas, Daniel Kane, Puqian Wang et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5 citations
- Distribution-free Testing for Halfspaces (Almost) Requires PAC LearningXi Chen, Shyamal PatelSODA 2022 · 2 citations
- Halfspaces are hard to test with relative errorXi Chen, Anindya De, Yizhi Huang, Shivam Nadimpalli et al.SODA 2026
- Non-adaptive vs Adaptive Queries in the Dense Graph Testing ModelOded Goldreich, Avi WigdersonFOCS 2021 · 7 citations
- A Mysterious Connection between Tolerant Junta Testing and Agnostically Learning ConjunctionsXi Chen, Shyamal Patel, Rocco A. ServedioSTOC 2026 · 4 citations
