SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2506.03894

Testing (Conditional) Mutual Information

Abstract

We investigate the sample complexity of mutual information and conditional mutual information testing. For conditional mutual information testing, given access to independent samples of a triple of random variables $(A, B, C)$ with unknown distribution, we want to distinguish between two cases: (i) $A$ and $C$ are conditionally independent, i.e., $I(A\!:\!C|B) = 0$, and (ii) $A$ and $C$ are conditionally dependent, i.e., $I(A\!:\!C|B) \geq \varepsilon$ for some threshold $\varepsilon$. We establish an upper bound on the number of samples required to distinguish between the two cases with high confidence, as a function of $\varepsilon$ and the three alphabet sizes. We conjecture that our bound is tight and show that this is indeed the case in several parameter regimes. For the special case of mutual information testing (when $B$ is trivial), we establish the necessary and sufficient number of samples required up to polylogarithmic terms. Our technical contributions include a novel method to efficiently simulate weakly correlated samples from the conditionally independent distribution $P_{A|B} P_{C|B} P_B$ given access to samples from an unknown distribution $P_{ABC}$, and a new estimator for equivalence testing that can handle such correlated samples, which might be of independent interest.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jan Seyfried, Sayantan Sen, Marco Tomamichel. 2025-06-04. Testing (Conditional) Mutual Information. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.03894

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Quasi-Monte Carlo Beyond Hardy-Krause II: $(1 + \varepsilon)n$ Samples Suffice

Numerical integration studies how well one can estimate the integral of a function $f$ over $[0,1)^d$ using $n$ sample points. The two classical methods, Monte Carlo (MC) and quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC), have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and a fundamental question is to design an approach that combines the benefits of both. Recently, building on the transference principle in discrepancy theory, Bansal and Jiang~\cite{BJ25a} gave a randomized QMC method that bridges MC and QMC guarantees using only i.i.d.\ samples. Their method also goes beyond the classical Koksma--Hlawka inequality: it achieves integration error $\widetilde{O}_d(\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)/n)$, where the smoothed-out variation $\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)$ can be substantially smaller than the Hardy--Krause variation that governs the classical bound. However, their algorithm requires $n^2$ i.i.d.\ samples as input, and this quadratic blowup is inherent to any method based on the transference principle. In this work, we bypass the quadratic blowup: for any constant $\varepsilon > 0$, we show that $(1+\varepsilon)n$ i.i.d.\ samples suffice to both obtain the beyond-Hardy--Krause guarantee of~\cite{BJ25a}, resolving an open problem posed there, and to produce low-discrepancy point sequences. Our algorithms are variants of the online Haar-thinning method of Dwivedi, Feldheim, Gurel-Gurevich, and Ramdas~\cite{DFG+19}.

cs.DS

Single-Exponential Algorithms and a Polynomial Kernel for Strong Connectivity Augmentation

Strong Connectivity Augmentation (SCA) asks whether a directed acyclic graph can be made strongly connected by adding at most $k$ prescribed links whose total weight is within a given budget. Klinkby, Misra, and Saurabh (SODA 2021) gave an $O^*(2^{O(k\log k)})$-time algorithm and asked whether the problem admits a single-exponential parameterized algorithm and a polynomial kernel. We answer both questions affirmatively: SCA can be solved in $O^*(9^k)$ time and admits a polynomial kernel with $O(k^4)$ vertices and $O(k^{16})$ bits. For unweighted SCA, we obtain $O^*(4^k)$ time and a kernel with $O(k^3)$ vertices. Our algorithms are based on a particularly simple reduction to Strongly Connected Spanning Subgraph with two edge costs.

cs.DS