Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Rocco A. Servedio

Publications and source records attributed to Rocco A. Servedio.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Distribution-Free Halfspace Testing with Samples

We prove a tight $Θ(n/ε)$ lower bound on the number of samples required for testing halfspaces over $\mathbb{R}^n$, in the distribution-free sample-based model where the underlying probability distribution is unknown to the algorithm, and the algorithm only receives random samples (i.e., it cannot make queries). This shows that testing is no more efficient than learning for halfspaces. We also show a matching upper bound for one-sided testers, improving on the standard (two-sided) testing-by-learning reduction, establishing that two-sided halfspace testers in this model have no advantage over one-sided testers.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Learning Functions of Halfspaces

We give an algorithm that learns arbitrary Boolean functions of $k$ arbitrary halfspaces over $\mathbb{R}^n$, in the challenging distribution-free Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) learning model, running in time $2^{\sqrt{n} \cdot (\log n)^{O(k)}}$. This is the first algorithm that can PAC learn even intersections of two halfspaces in time $2^{o(n)}.$

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Model-agnostic super-resolution in high dimensions

The problem of super-resolution, roughly speaking, is to reconstruct an unknown signal to high accuracy, given (potentially noisy) information about its low-degree Fourier coefficients. Prior results on super-resolution have imposed strong modeling assumptions on the signal, typically requiring that it is a linear combination of spatially separated point sources. In this work we analyze a very general version of the super-resolution problem by considering completely general non-negative signals (equivalently, distributions) over the $d$-dimensional torus $[0,1)^d$; we do not assume any spatial separation between point sources, or even that the distribution is a finite linear combination of point sources. The question naturally arises: what can be said about super-resolution in such a general setting? - As a warm-up, we first give a set of results for reconstructing distributions under the Wasserstein distance. We establish essentially matching upper and lower bounds on the cutoff frequency $T$ and the magnitude $κ$ of the noise for which accurate reconstruction is possible: we show that for $d$-dimensional distributions, estimates of $\approx \exp(d)$ many Fourier coefficients are both necessary and sufficient for accurate Wasserstein reconstruction. - As our main result, we define a new notion of "heavy hitter" reconstruction for distributions, which essentially amounts to achieving high-accuracy reconstruction of all "sufficiently dense" regions of the distribution. We give essentially matching upper and lower bounds on the cutoff frequency $T$ and the magnitude $κ$ of the noise for which accurate reconstruction is possible under this notion. Our results show that (in sharp contrast with Wasserstein reconstruction) accurate estimates of only $\approx \exp(\sqrt{d})$ many Fourier coefficients are both necessary and sufficient for heavy hitter reconstruction.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Improved Bounds for Coin Flipping, Leader Election, and Random Selection

Random selection, leader election, and collective coin flipping are fundamental tasks in fault-tolerant distributed computing. We study these problems in the full-information model where despite decades of study, key gaps remain in our understanding of the trade-offs between round complexity, communication per player in each round, and adversarial resilience. We make progress by proving improved bounds for these problems. We first show that any $k$-round coin flipping protocol over $\ell$ players, each player sending one bit per round, can be biased by $O(\ell/\log^{(k)}(\ell))$ bad players. We obtain a similar lower bound for leader election. This strengthens prior best bounds [RSZ, SICOMP 2002] of $O(\ell/\log^{(2k-1)}(\ell))$ for coin flipping protocols and $O(\ell/\log^{(2k+1)}(\ell))$ for leader election protocols. Our result implies that any (1-bit per player) protocol tolerating linear fraction of bad players requires at least $\log^* \ell$ rounds, showing existing protocols [RZ, JCSS 2001; F, FOCS 1999] are near-optimal. We next initiate the study of one-round, (1-bit per player) random selection. For all $m\ge (\log(\ell))^2$, we obtain an optimal protocol (a first in the full information model for any task): We construct a protocol resilient to $O(\ell / m)$ bad players that outputs $m$ uniform random bits. And, we show that any protocol that outputs $m$ uniform random bits can be corrupted using $O(\ell / m)$ bad players. This also implies a one-round leader election protocol resilient to $\ell / (\log \ell)^2$ bad players, improving the prior best protocol [RZ, JCSS 2001] which was resilient to $\ell / (\log \ell)^3$ bad players. Our resilience matches that of the best one-round coin flipping protocol by Ajtai & Linial. To obtain our lower bound, we introduce multi-output influence, an extension of influence of boolean functions to the multi-output setting.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Sublinear-query relative-error testing of halfspaces

The relative-error property testing model was introduced in [CDHLNSY24] to facilitate the study of property testing for "sparse" Boolean-valued functions, i.e. ones for which only a small fraction of all input assignments satisfy the function. In this framework, the distance from the unknown target function $f$ that is being tested to a function $g$ is defined as $\mathrm{Vol}(f \mathop{\triangle} g)/\mathrm{Vol}(f)$, where the numerator is the fraction of inputs on which $f$ and $g$ disagree and the denominator is the fraction of inputs that satisfy $f$. Recent work [CDHNSY26] has shown that over the Boolean domain $\{0,1\}^n$, any relative-error testing algorithm for the fundamental class of halfspaces (i.e. linear threshold functions) must make $Ω(\log n)$ oracle calls. In this paper we complement the [CDHNSY26] lower bound by showing that halfspaces can be relative-error tested over $\mathbb{R}^n$ under the standard $N(0,I_n)$ Gaussian distribution using a sublinear number of oracle calls -- in particular, substantially fewer than would be required for learning. Our results use a wide range of tools including Hermite analysis, Gaussian isoperimetric inequalities, and geometric results on noise sensitivity and surface area.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Halfspaces are hard to test with relative error

Several recent works [DHLNSY25, CPPS25a, CPPS25b] have studied a model of property testing of Boolean functions under a \emph{relative-error} criterion. In this model, the distance from a target function $f: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ that is being tested to a function $g$ is defined relative to the number of inputs $x$ for which $f(x)=1$; moreover, testing algorithms in this model have access both to a black-box oracle for $f$ and to independent uniform satisfying assignments of $f$. The motivation for this model is that it provides a natural framework for testing \emph{sparse} Boolean functions that have few satisfying assignments, analogous to well-studied models for property testing of sparse graphs. The main result of this paper is a lower bound for testing \emph{halfspaces} (i.e., linear threshold functions) in the relative error model: we show that $\tildeΩ(\log n)$ oracle calls are required for any relative-error halfspace testing algorithm over the Boolean hypercube $\{0,1\}^n$. This stands in sharp contrast both with the constant-query testability (independent of $n$) of halfspaces in the standard model [MORS10], and with the positive results for relative-error testing of many other classes given in [DHLNSY25, CPPS25a, CPPS25b]. Our lower bound for halfspaces gives the first example of a well-studied class of functions for which relative-error testing is provably more difficult than standard-model testing.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Is nasty noise actually harder than malicious noise?

We consider the relative abilities and limitations of computationally efficient algorithms for learning in the presence of noise, under two well-studied and challenging adversarial noise models for learning Boolean functions: malicious noise, in which an adversary can arbitrarily corrupt a random subset of examples given to the learner; and nasty noise, in which an adversary can arbitrarily corrupt an adversarially chosen subset of examples given to the learner. We consider both the distribution-independent and fixed-distribution settings. Our main results highlight a dramatic difference between these two settings: For distribution-independent learning, we prove a strong equivalence between the two noise models: If a class ${\cal C}$ of functions is efficiently learnable in the presence of $η$-rate malicious noise, then it is also efficiently learnable in the presence of $η$-rate nasty noise. In sharp contrast, for the fixed-distribution setting we show an arbitrarily large separation: Under a standard cryptographic assumption, for any arbitrarily large value $r$ there exists a concept class for which there is a ratio of $r$ between the rate $η_{malicious}$ of malicious noise that polynomial-time learning algorithms can tolerate, versus the rate $η_{nasty}$ of nasty noise that such learning algorithms can tolerate. To offset the negative result for the fixed-distribution setting, we define a broad and natural class of algorithms, namely those that ignore contradictory examples (ICE). We show that for these algorithms, malicious noise and nasty noise are equivalent up to a factor of two in the noise rate: Any efficient ICE learner that succeeds with $η$-rate malicious noise can be converted to an efficient learner that succeeds with $η/2$-rate nasty noise. We further show that the above factor of two is necessary, again under a standard cryptographic assumption.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

DNF formulas are efficiently testable with relative error

We give a poly$(s,1/ε)$-query algorithm for testing whether an unknown and arbitrary function $f: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ is an $s$-term DNF, in the challenging relative-error framework for Boolean function property testing that was recently introduced and studied in a number of works [CDH+25b, CPPS25a, CPPS25b, CDH+25a]. This gives the first example of a rich and natural class of functions which may depend on a super-constant number of variables and yet is efficiently testable in the relative-error model with constant query complexity. A crucial new ingredient enabling our approach is a novel decomposition of any $s$-term DNF formula into ``local clusters'' of terms. Our results demonstrate that this new decomposition can be usefully exploited for algorithms even when the $s$-term DNF is not explicitly given; we believe that this decomposition may have applications in other contexts.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2025

Testing noisy low-degree polynomials for sparsity

We consider the problem of testing whether an unknown low-degree polynomial $p$ over $\mathbb{R}^n$ is sparse versus far from sparse, given access to noisy evaluations of the polynomial $p$ at \emph{randomly chosen points}. This is a property-testing analogue of classical problems on learning sparse low-degree polynomials with noise, extending the work of Chen, De, and Servedio (2020) from noisy \emph{linear} functions to general low-degree polynomials. Our main result gives a \emph{precise characterization} of when sparsity testing for low-degree polynomials admits constant sample complexity independent of dimension, together with a matching constant-sample algorithm in that regime. For any mean-zero, variance-one finitely supported distribution $\boldsymbol{X}$ over the reals, degree $d$, and any sparsity parameters $s \leq T$, we define a computable function $\mathrm{MSG}_{\boldsymbol{X},d}(\cdot)$, and: - For $T \ge \mathrm{MSG}_{\boldsymbol{X},d}(s)$, we give an $O_{s,\boldsymbol{X},d}(1)$-sample algorithm that distinguishes whether a multilinear degree-$d$ polynomial over $\mathbb{R}^n$ is $s$-sparse versus $\varepsilon$-far from $T$-sparse, given examples $(\boldsymbol{x},\, p(\boldsymbol{x}) + \mathrm{noise})_{\boldsymbol{x} \sim \boldsymbol{X}^{\otimes n}}$. Crucially, the sample complexity is \emph{completely independent} of the ambient dimension $n$. - For $T \leq \mathrm{MSG}_{\boldsymbol{X},d}(s) - 1$, we show that even without noise, any algorithm given samples $(\boldsymbol{x},p(\boldsymbol{x}))_{\boldsymbol{x} \sim \boldsymbol{X}^{\otimes n}}$ must use $Ω_{\boldsymbol{X},d,s}(\log n)$ examples. Our techniques employ a generalization of the results of Dinur et al. (2007) on the Fourier tails of bounded functions over $\{0,1\}^n$ to a broad range of finitely supported distributions, which may be of independent interest.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2025

Sparsifying Suprema of Gaussian Processes

We give a dimension-independent sparsification result for suprema of centered Gaussian processes: Let $T$ be any (possibly infinite) bounded set of vectors in $\mathbb{R}^n$, and let $\{\boldsymbol{X}_t := t \cdot \boldsymbol{g} \}_{t\in T}$ be the canonical Gaussian process on $T$, where $\boldsymbol{g}\sim N(0, I_n)$. We show that there is an $O_\varepsilon(1)$-size subset $S \subseteq T$ and a set of real values $\{c_s\}_{s \in S}$ such that the random variable $\sup_{s \in S} \{\boldsymbol{X}_s + c_s\}$ is an $\varepsilon$-approximator\,(in $L^1$) of the random variable $\sup_{t \in T} {\boldsymbol{X}}_t$. Notably, the size of the sparsifier $S$ is completely independent of both $|T|$ and the ambient dimension $n$. We give two applications of this sparsification theorem: - A "Junta Theorem" for Norms: We show that given any norm $ν(x)$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$, there is another norm $ψ(x)$ depending only on the projection of $x$ onto $O_\varepsilon(1)$ directions, for which $ψ({\boldsymbol{g}})$ is a multiplicative $(1 \pm \varepsilon)$-approximation of $ν({\boldsymbol{g}})$ with probability $1-\varepsilon$ for ${\boldsymbol{g}} \sim N(0,I_n)$. - Sparsification of Convex Sets: We show that any intersection of (possibly infinitely many) halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^n$ that are at distance $r$ from the origin is $\varepsilon$-close (under $N(0,I_n)$) to an intersection of only $O_{r,\varepsilon}(1)$ halfspaces. This yields new polynomial-time \emph{agnostic learning} and \emph{tolerant property testing} algorithms for intersections of halfspaces.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2025

Relative-error unateness testing

The model of relative-error property testing of Boolean functions has been the subject of significant recent research effort [CDH+24][CPPS25a][CPPS25b] In this paper we consider the problem of relative-error testing an unknown and arbitrary $f: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ for the property of being a unate function, i.e. a function that is either monotone non-increasing or monotone non-decreasing in each of the $n$ input variables. Our first result is a one-sided non-adaptive algorithm for this problem that makes $\tilde{O}(\log(N)/ε)$ samples and queries, where $N=|f^{-1}(1)|$ is the number of satisfying assignments of the function that is being tested and the value of $N$ is given as an input parameter to the algorithm. Building on this algorithm, we next give a one-sided adaptive algorithm for this problem that does not need to be given the value of $N$ and with high probability makes $\tilde{O}(\log(N)/ε)$ samples and queries. We also give lower bounds for both adaptive and non-adaptive two-sided algorithms that are given the value of $N$ up to a constant multiplicative factor. In the non-adaptive case, our lower bounds essentially match the complexity of the algorithm that we provide.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2025

Relative-error monotonicity testing

The standard model of Boolean function property testing is not well suited for testing $\textit{sparse}$ 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 $\textit{relative-error testing}$, which provides a natural framework for testing sparse functions. This new model defines the distance between two functions $f, g: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ to be $$\textsf{reldist}(f,g) := { \frac{|f^{-1}(1) \triangle g^{-1}(1)|} {|f^{-1}(1)|}}.$$ This is a more demanding distance measure than the usual Hamming distance ${ {|f^{-1}(1) \triangle g^{-1}(1)|}/{2^n}}$ when $|f^{-1}(1)| \ll 2^n$; to compensate for this, algorithms in the new model have access both to a black-box oracle for the function $f$ being tested and to a source of independent uniform satisfying assignments of $f$. 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 $\textit{monotone}$ Boolean functions. We give upper and lower bounds which are parameterized by $N=|f^{-1}(1)|$, the sparsity of the function $f$ 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.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2025

DNF Learning via Locally Mixing Random Walks

We give two results on PAC learning DNF formulas using membership queries in the challenging "distribution-free" learning framework, where learning algorithms must succeed for an arbitrary and unknown distribution over $\{0,1\}^n$. (1) We first give a quasi-polynomial time "list-decoding" algorithm for learning a single term of an unknown DNF formula. More precisely, for any target $s$-term DNF formula $f = T_1 \vee \cdots \vee T_s$ over $\{0,1\}^n$ and any unknown distribution $D$ over $\{0,1\}^n$, our algorithm, which uses membership queries and random examples from $D$, runs in $\textsf{quasipoly}(n,s)$ time and outputs a list $L$ of candidate terms such that with high probability some term $T_i$ of $f$ belongs to $L$. (2) We then use result (1) to give a $\textsf{quasipoly}(n,s)$-time algorithm, in the distribution-free PAC learning model with membership queries, for learning the class of size-$s$ DNFs in which all terms have the same size. Our algorithm learns using a DNF hypothesis. The key tool used to establish result (1) is a new result on "locally mixing random walks," which, roughly speaking, shows that a random walk on a graph that is covered by a small number of expanders has a non-negligible probability of mixing quickly in a subset of these expanders.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2025

A Mysterious Connection Between Tolerant Junta Testing and Agnostically Learning Conjunctions

The main conceptual contribution of this paper is identifying a previously unnoticed connection between two central problems in computational learning theory and property testing: agnostically learning conjunctions and tolerantly testing juntas. Inspired by this connection, the main technical contribution is a pair of improved algorithms for these two problems. In more detail, - We give a distribution-free algorithm for agnostically PAC learning conjunctions over $\{\pm 1\}^n$ that runs in time $2^{\widetilde{O}(n^{1/3})}$, for constant excess error $\varepsilon$. This improves on the fastest previously published algorithm, which runs in time $2^{\widetilde{O}(n^{1/2})}$ [KKMS08]. - Building on the ideas in our agnostic conjunction learner and using significant additional technical ingredients, we give an adaptive tolerant testing algorithm for $k$-juntas that makes $2^{\widetilde{O}(k^{1/3})}$ queries, for constant "gap parameter" $\varepsilon$ between the "near" and "far" cases. This improves on the best previous results, due to [ITW21, NP24], which make $2^{\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{k})}$ queries. Since there is a known $2^{\widetildeΩ(\sqrt{k})}$ lower bound for non-adaptive tolerant junta testers, our result shows that adaptive tolerant junta testing algorithms provably outperform non-adaptive ones.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2025

Testing Juntas and Junta Subclasses with Relative Error

This papers considers the junta testing problem in a recently introduced ``relative error'' variant of the standard Boolean function property testing model. In relative-error testing we measure the distance from $f$ to $g$, where $f,g: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$, by the ratio of $|f^{-1}(1) \triangle g^{-1}(1)|$ (the number of inputs on which $f$ and $g$ disagree) to $|f^{-1}(1)|$ (the number of satisfying assignments of $f$), and we give the testing algorithm both black-box access to $f$ and also access to independent uniform samples from $f^{-1}(1)$. Chen et al. (SODA 2025) observed that the class of $k$-juntas is $\text{poly}(2^k,1/ε)$-query testable in the relative-error model, and asked whether $\text{poly}(k,1/ε)$ queries is achievable. We answer this question affirmatively by giving a $\tilde{O}(k/ε)$-query algorithm, matching the optimal complexity achieved in the less challenging standard model. Moreover, as our main result, we show that any subclass of $k$-juntas that is closed under permuting variables is relative-error testable with a similar complexity. This gives highly efficient relative-error testing algorithms for a number of well-studied function classes, including size-$k$ decision trees, size-$k$ branching programs, and size-$k$ Boolean formulas.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2025

Relative-error testing of conjunctions and decision lists

We study the relative-error property testing model for Boolean functions that was recently introduced in the work of Chen et al. (SODA 2025). In relative-error testing, the testing algorithm gets uniform random satisfying assignments as well as black-box queries to $f$, and it must accept $f$ with high probability whenever $f$ has the property that is being tested and reject any $f$ that is relative-error far from having the property. Here the relative-error distance from $f$ to a function $g$ is measured with respect to $|f^{-1}(1)|$ rather than with respect to the entire domain size $2^n$ as in the Hamming distance measure that is used in the standard model; thus, unlike the standard model, relative-error testing allows us to study the testability of sparse Boolean functions that have few satisfying assignments. It was shown in Chen et al. (SODA 2025) that relative-error testing is at least as difficult as standard-model property testing, but for many natural and important Boolean function classes the precise relationship between the two notions is unknown. In this paper we consider the well-studied and fundamental properties of being a conjunction and being a decision list. In the relative-error setting, we give an efficient one-sided error tester for conjunctions with running time and query complexity $O(1/ε)$. Secondly, we give a two-sided relative-error $\tilde{O}$$(1/ε)$ tester for decision lists, matching the query complexity of the state-of-the-art algorithm in the standard model Bshouty (RANDOM 2020) and Diakonikolas et al. (FOCS 2007).

cs.CC↗
arXiv2024

Testing Convex Truncation

We study the basic statistical problem of testing whether normally distributed $n$-dimensional data has been truncated, i.e. altered by only retaining points that lie in some unknown truncation set $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$. As our main algorithmic results, (1) We give a computationally efficient $O(n)$-sample algorithm that can distinguish the standard normal distribution $N(0,I_n)$ from $N(0,I_n)$ conditioned on an unknown and arbitrary convex set $S$. (2) We give a different computationally efficient $O(n)$-sample algorithm that can distinguish $N(0,I_n)$ from $N(0,I_n)$ conditioned on an unknown and arbitrary mixture of symmetric convex sets. These results stand in sharp contrast with known results for learning or testing convex bodies with respect to the normal distribution or learning convex-truncated normal distributions, where state-of-the-art algorithms require essentially $n^{\sqrt{n}}$ samples. An easy argument shows that no finite number of samples suffices to distinguish $N(0,I_n)$ from an unknown and arbitrary mixture of general (not necessarily symmetric) convex sets, so no common generalization of results (1) and (2) above is possible. We also prove that any algorithm (computationally efficient or otherwise) that can distinguish $N(0,I_n)$ from $N(0,I_n)$ conditioned on an unknown symmetric convex set must use $Ω(n)$ samples. This shows that the sample complexity of each of our algorithms is optimal up to a constant factor.

cs.DS↗