English

Relative-error monotonicity testing

Computational Complexity 2025-09-03 v2 Discrete Mathematics Data Structures and Algorithms

Abstract

The standard model of Boolean function property testing is not well suited for testing sparse\textit{sparse} functions which have few satisfying assignments, since every such function is close (in the usual Hamming distance metric) to the constant-0 function. In this work we propose and investigate a new model for property testing of Boolean functions, called relative-error testing\textit{relative-error testing}, which provides a natural framework for testing sparse functions. This new model defines the distance between two functions f,g:{0,1}n{0,1}f, g: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\} to be reldist(f,g):=f1(1)g1(1)f1(1).\textsf{reldist}(f,g) := { \frac{|f^{-1}(1) \triangle g^{-1}(1)|} {|f^{-1}(1)|}}. This is a more demanding distance measure than the usual Hamming distance f1(1)g1(1)/2n{ {|f^{-1}(1) \triangle g^{-1}(1)|}/{2^n}} when f1(1)2n|f^{-1}(1)| \ll 2^n; to compensate for this, algorithms in the new model have access both to a black-box oracle for the function ff being tested and to a source of independent uniform satisfying assignments of ff. In this paper we first give a few general results about the relative-error testing model; then, as our main technical contribution, we give a detailed study of algorithms and lower bounds for relative-error testing of monotone\textit{monotone} Boolean functions. We give upper and lower bounds which are parameterized by N=f1(1)N=|f^{-1}(1)|, the sparsity of the function ff being tested. Our results show that there are interesting differences between relative-error monotonicity testing of sparse Boolean functions, and monotonicity testing in the standard model. These results motivate further study of the testability of Boolean function properties in the relative-error model.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2410.09235,
  title  = {Relative-error monotonicity testing},
  author = {Xi Chen and Anindya De and Yizhi Huang and Yuhao Li and Shivam Nadimpalli and Rocco A. Servedio and Tianqi Yang},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.09235},
  year   = {2025}
}

Comments

Updated non-adaptive lower bound argument in Section 5; results are unchanged