Download SimpleConstructions

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Simple Constructions of Almost k-wise
Independent Random Variables
Gil Tamir 08/12/2008
Noga
Alon
Johan
Hastad
Oded
Goldreich
Rene
Peralta
Introduction
Randomized algorithms
General Idea
Importance
Deterministic
Simulation
Interest
Algorithms that have access to a random number generator to generate random
bits.
There exist many problems that can be solved efficiently using random
algorithms.
• Examples include prime numbers testing or finding cycles in a graph.
A typical way is to iterate over all possible generations of random bits.
• Note that the number of options is exponential to the number of random bits!
Certain problems can be efficiently solved using random variables which aren’t
completely random, yet have a certain random property.
Let’s focus on a specific type of random property
1
Definitions
Definition: k-wise independence
A sample space S 
0,1 ,
n
where if X  x1...xn is chosen Uniformly from S,
then for any k positions i1  i2  ...  ik and any  =1... k
Pr  xi1 ...xik  1... k   2  k
3
Definitions
Definition: (ε,k)-wise independence
A sample space S 
0,1 ,
n
where if X  x1...xn is chosen Uniformly from S,
then for any k positions i1  i2  ...  ik and any  =1... k
Pr  xi1 ...xik  1... k   2 k  
4
Definitions
Definition: (ε,k)-biased linearly, for k>0
A sample space S 
0,1
n
,
where if X  x1...xn is chosen Uniformly from S,
then for any k  0 positions i1  i2  ...  ik
Pr  xi1 ...xik xi1 ...xik  0   Pr  xi1 ...xik xi1 ...xik  1  
2
2




• If S is ( , n)-biased linearly, we denote it simply  -biased linearly
5
Definitions
Let’s examine the relations between the Probability Spaces over n bits
All Sample
spaces
(ε,k)-wise
independent
(ε,k)-biased
linearly
k-wise
independent
n-wise
independent
(same ε,k)
6
Definitions
Short explanation
• Let S be a k -wise independent sample space over n bits,
X  x1...xn be a uniformly chosen vector from S,
and a set of k  0 positions i1  i2  ...  ik .

Now let J = 1... k  0,1 s.t 1... k 1... k
k
• From symmetry we get J  0,1
k
2
thus since since S is k-wise independent,
Pr  xi1 ...xik  J  = 1 2.
2

0
(ε,k)-biased
linearly
k-wise
independent
• Finally we get Pr  xi1 ...xik xi1 ...xik  0  
2


Pr  xi1 ...xik  J   1/2, and S is  -biased linearly, for any  .
7
Interest
 
How small can a sample space S  0,1
definitions be?
n
which satisfies these
n-wise
independence
S must contain every vector X  0,1  S  2n
k-wise
independence
Alon, Babai and Itai have shown a construction of size roughly nk /2 .
It has been proven to be within a constant factor of the theoretical bound.
(ε,k)-wise
independence
 klog(n) 
We will show a construction of size roughly 

 

n
2
8
Motivation
(ε,k)-wise vs. k-wise independent sample spaces
• In many cases, if an algorithm behaves “well”
on points chosen from a k -wise independent sample space,
then it will behave “essentially as well” on points chosen from
( , k )-wise independent sample space.
• In many cases, iterating over all n k /2 points in a k-wise sample space
is simply not efficient,
2
 klog(n) 
yet iterating over all 
 points in a ( , k )-sample space is.

 
9
Goal
small (ε,k)-wise independent probability space over n bits
• Given (n, k ,  ), where
- n  2t  1
- k  2d  1, k  n log(n)
-  0
if n not as such, use a bigger n ' (n '  2n)
if k is even, use k ' : k  1
if k  n log(n) , we'll handle it later
• We create an ( , k )-wise independent S 
 k log(n) 
so that S  

 

0,1 ,
n
2
 k log(n) 
• This is the same as constructing such S using 2 log 
 bits
 

10
Previous results
small (ε,k)-wise independent probability space over n bits
• Naor and Naor:
Construction of ( , k )-wise independent S 
so that S 
0,1 ,
n
k log(n)
4
 k log(n) 
• This is the same as constructing such S using log 
 bits
4
 

11
Comparison
Our results vs. Previous results
2
 k log(n)   k log(n) 
 k log(n)   k log(n) 
2 log 
,
vs.
log
 


, 

4
4
 
  

 
  

• Asymptotically, the bits used are the same.
• Our result size bound is better long as  2  1  k log(n) 
• In any realistic application,   2 k ,

k
and we get sizes 2 k log(n)

2


vs. 24 k k log(n) .
• In cases where in addition, 2k is much larger than log(n)
 
 
we get sizes roughly 22 k vs. 24 k
12
Method
2log(
n  2  1, k  2d  1. Build ( , k)-wise independent Sn
t
1 dt
1 dt

)
1
2log(
 1  dt 
Use 2 log 
 bits to get a  -biased linearly T1 dt
  
2
Consider H n(1 dt ) for which any k rows are linearly independent.
2 log(
3
Sn
1 dt


)
 0,1
n
 0,1
1 dt
.
)
is the sample space from which the
uniformly selected x  S is defined:
• Select uniformly z  T
• x  Hz
13
Method
0,1
2log(
2 log(
1 dt

1 dt

0,1
)
n
n-wise
independent
)-wise independent
Im( H )1n dt
1
k-wise
independent
2
0,1
1 dt
(1+dt)-wise
independent
2log(
T1 dt
1 dt

ε-biased
ε-biased
linearly
linearly
2 log(
Sn
)
1 dt

)
(ε,k)-wise
independent
3
14
The construction
1
This works for all m, n such that n  2m
Denote Sn2 m  {0,1}n the sample space generated by 2m bits,
from which a uniformly selected vector R  r0 ...rn 1 is defined:
• Select uniformly two vectors X , Y  GF (2m )
• ri = X i Y
2
GF (2m ) : This notation denotes the standard field of size 2m.
Since all fields of such size are isomorphic to each other,
we can choose the following field:
• Members : all polynomials over
2
with degree  m.
• Operations : standard  ,   polynomial operations,
modulo a specific irreducible polynomial of degree m
15
The construction
1
Proposition
Sn2 m is (n 2m ) -biased linearly
2log(
Specifically: T1 dt
1 dt

)
is  -biased linearly
Proof
Let R  r0 ...rn 1 be a uniformly chosen vector from S,
and let i1  i2  ...  ik be a non empty series of indexes.
we need to prove
Pr  (ri1 ...rik ) ( ri1 ...rik )

2
 0   Pr  ( ri1 ...rik ) ( ri1 ...rik )


2
 1  n 2 m

16
The construction
1
Proof continued (1)
• First, let X , Y  GF (2m ) be the two creators of R, thus:
 k 2  k   k

ij
(ri1 ...rik ) (ri1 ...rik )    ri j     ri j     X Y  
2
 j 1 2  j 1 2  j 1
2
k
k
j
X
 Y
j 1
i
2
• Let's define p( )    j , a polynomial over GF (2m ) and we get:
i
j 1
(ri1 ...rik ) (ri1 ...rik )  p( X ) Y
2
2
17
The construction
1
Proof continued (2)
• Using Bayes ' theorem we get:
Pr  p( X ) Y
2
 0   Pr  p( X ) Y
Pr  p( X ) Y
• Pr  p( X ) Y
• Pr  p( X ) Y
2
2
2
2
 0 p( X )  0  *Pr  p( X )  0  
 0 p( X )  0  *Pr  p( X )  0
 0 p( X )  0   1 always true
1

Y is chosen uniformly
 0 p( X )  0  
2
• Pr  p( X )  0  (n  1) 2m
0  deg(p)  ( n  1), X is chosen uniformly
n  2m assures that p can not be the zero polynomial
18
The construction
1
Proof continued (3)
This leads us to:
• Pr  p( X ) Y
2
• Pr  p( X ) Y
2
1
 0   * Pr  p ( X )  0  1* Pr  p ( X )  0
2
1
 1  * Pr  p( X )  0
2
And finally:
• Pr  p( X ) Y
2
 1  Pr  p ( X ) Y
2
 0   (n  1) 2m  n 2m
19
The construction
2
The linear transformation H
• Let x1 ,..., xn
n  2t -1 be the non-zero elements of GF(2t ) , as row vectors.
2 t 1 
1 x x 3
x
1
1
1


1 x2 x23
x2 2t 1 
• Define H := 

1


3
2 t 1 
xn 
1 xn xn
• Notice that H has n rows, and 1  dt columns.
• It is known that any k k  2d  1 rows of H are linearly independent
over GF(2)
20
The construction
3
Proposition
2log(
Sn
1 dt

)


: Im H T 2 log( 1dt ) is a ( , k )-biased linearly
1 dt
Proof
Let R  r0 ...rn 1 be a uniformly chosen vector,
and let i1  i2  ...  ik be a non empty series of indexes.
we need to prove
Pr  (ri1 ...rik ) ( ri1 ...rik )

2
 0   Pr  ( ri1 ...rik ) ( ri1 ...rik )


2
 1  

21
The construction
3
Proof continued
2log(
• First, let V  v1...vn  T1 dt
1 dt
)

be the source of R, thus:
 k 2   k   k  1 dt

(ri1 ...rik ) (ri1 ...rik )    ri j     ri j       hi j ,l  vl   
2
 2
 j 1 2  j 1  2  j 1  l 1
 1 dt  k
   1 dt
 k

     hi j ,l  vl      vl    hi j ,l   
 l 1 j 1
 

 2  l 1
 j 1
 2
 
• Now since the sum of rows i1 ,.., ik of H is not equal to 0,
 k'

the above sum is equal to   vl j '  for some non-empty series of indexes l1  l2  ...  lk ' .
 j '1 2
2log(
• Now since T1 dt
1 dt
)

is  -biased linearly:
 k '

 k '



Pr   vl j '   0   Pr   vl j '   1   , and the proposition follows.
 j '1  2

 j '1  2 
22
The construction
3
Almost final step
2log(
• We've shown Sn
1 dt
)

to be ( , k )-biased linearly.
• Recall the lemma stating:
For any sample space S , if S is ( , k )-biased linearly,
then it is also ( , k )-wise independent.
2log(
Thus we conclude that Sn
1 dt
)

is ( , k )-wise independent.
23
The construction
3
The step after the almost final step
• If k  n log(n), we can simply use the construction from
1
n
with n : n, m : log   , (n  2 m as required)
 
2
n
and get  -biased sample space of size  
 
• Using the same lemma as before, this sample space is ( , k )-wise independent.
 k log(n) 
• since k  n log(n), and thus n  k log( n), this satisfies our goal of 


 
2
24
The construction
3
Interesting Bonus!
• Since 0,1
1 dt
is (1  dt )-wise independent, then for any   0 it is  -biased linearly.
• Thus, following the same proof, for any   0, Im  H  is ( , k )-biased linearly.
• Again, using the same lemma as before,
we conclude that for any   0, Im  H  is ( , k )-wise independent.
• This proves that Im  H   0,1 is k -wise independent.
n
25
The construction
3
Concluding remarks
In our construction we relied on an existing representation
of GF(2m ). This implies having an irreducable polynomial
of degree m over GF(2). Here are two ways to overcome this:
• In many applications, we're allowed a preprocessing stage of
comparable size to that of the needed sample space.
In such cases, we can simply go over all polynomials of degree  m,
and discard those with non-trivial divisors.
• Another option is to sample m degree polynomials randomly,
until an irreducable one is found. The density of irreducables
is  1 m , so with roughly m 2 samples we succeed with good probability.
26
The construction
3
Future Improvements
Our construction for finding ( ,k)-wise independent sample space
in 0,1 composed of two main steps:
n
k log n
 k log(n) 
1 Finding a  -biased linearly space in 0,1 of size 

 

 2  Finding a linear transformation from 0,1
k log n
2
to 0,1
n
with an image that is a k -wise independent space
• Part  2  has been proven to be within constant factor of the optimum,
and thus improving upon this method can only be done by finding a smaller
 -biased linearly space in 0,1
k log n
.
• A completely different method might exist, and might produce better results.
27