interactive channel capacity. [shannon 48]: a mathematical theory of communication an exact formula...
TRANSCRIPT
Interactive Channel Capacity
[Shannon 48]:A Mathematical Theory of
Communication
An exact formula for the channel
capacity of any noisy channel
-noisy channel:Each bit is flipped with prob
Alice wants to send bits to Bob. They
only have access to an -noisy channel.
How many bits Alice needs to send, so
that Bob can retrieve the original bits,
with prob ?
1-
1-
0
1 1
0ππ
Channel Capacity [Shannon 48]: 1) are sufficient2) are needed
channel capacity:
Communication Complexity [Yao 79]:
Player gets . Player gets They need to compute ( is publicly known)How many bits they need to
communicate? probabilistic CC of (with negligible error for
every ) (with shared random string)
CC over the -noisy channel: How many communication bits are
neededto compute over the -noisy channel? CC of over -noisy channel (with negligible error for
every ) (with shared random string)
Interactive Channel Capacity: probabilistic CC of CC of over -noisy channel
(note: is not the input size)
[Schulman 92]: Hence, [Sch,BR,B,GMS,BK,BN]:Simulation of any CC protocol in
the presence of adversarial noise[Shannon 48]: [Schulman 92]: Is ?
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[KR 13]: Upper Bound: In particular, for small enough , (with strict inequality)Order of Communication Model: Order of communication in the
protocol is pre-determined (i.e., non-adaptive)
(otherwise both players may try to send bits at the same time)
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[KR 13]: Upper Bound: In particular, for small enough , (with strict inequality)
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[KR 13]: Upper Bound: In particular, for small enough , (with strict inequality)The main ideas seem to be valid for other communication models, but
without the factor
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
Order of Communication Models: 1) Pre-determined: At each time stepexactly one player sends a bit2) Alternating: The players alternatein sending bits3) Adaptive: If both send bits atthe same time these bits are lost4) Two channels: Each player sends abit whenever she wants
[KR 13]: Lower Bound: For the alternating communication
model
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound: For alternating communication
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound: For alternating communication For alternating communication in the
adversarial case!!
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound: For the adversarial noise channel of
[GHS 14]
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound: For the adversarial noise channel of
[GHS 14] Order of communication is not pre-
determined
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound:
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
[Haeupler 14]: Lower Bound:
Conjecture: [H 14]: Similar bounds for pre-determinedorder of communication are false,without some regularity assumption
onthe order of communication
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
Upper Bound:
We give a function that proves this
We prove a lower bound on
πͺ (πΊ )=π₯π’π¦π’π§ππββ
π¦π’π§{ π :πͺπͺ ( π )=π}( π
πͺπͺπΊ (π ) )
Pointer Jumping Game: ary tree, depth , owns odd layers owns even layers
Each player gets an edge going out ofevery node that she ownsGoal: Find the leaf reached
deg=
depth=
Pointer Jumping Game: Our main result:
Hence,
deg=
depth=
High Level Idea: starts by sending the first edge ( bits)With one of these bits was flippedCase I: sends the next edge ( bits)With these bits are wasted (since had the wrong first edge)In expectation: wasted bits
deg=
depth=
High Level Idea: starts by sending the first edge ( bits)With one of these bits was flippedCase II: sends additional bits, tocorrect the first edge.Needs to send bits to correct one error
deg=
depth=
High Level Idea: starts by sending the first edge ( bits)With one of these bits was flipped
In both cases bits were wasted (in expectation).
deg=
depth=
Some More Details: a distribution over inputs for Alice a distribution over inputs for Bob , min-entropy of (first edge of Alice)Nice Game:1) 2) 3) Lemma: For any nice game,
Proof: By induction on the depth : Consider the first bits transmitted. Let be the number of bits sent by Alice. After bits are sent, fix the first edge and reveal the errors (if any). Focus on the remaining tree of depth .Case 1: : The bits that Bob sent are wasted (using sub-additivity)Case 2: : Alice wasted bits.In both cases, the remained game is nice w.h.p.
Why itβs not so easy: 1) is constant, while is unbounded, so we cannot afford any error that depends on 2) With small probability, we get an un-nice game, so we must deal with un-nice games 3) In the inductive formula, we completely ignored the error of the protocol 4) We have to deal with both entropy and min-entropy in the same argument. We introduce a general way to deal with that (flattening a distribution)
Thank You!