RECORD
Communication Complexity of Permutation-Invariant Functions
Computational Complexity · Submitted 31 May 2015
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim For such functions, we present a simple complexity measure (computable in time polynomial in $n$ given an implicit description of $f$) that describes their communication complexity up to polynomial factors and up to an additive error that is logarithmic in the input size.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Motivated by the quest for a broader understanding of communication complexity of simple functions, we introduce the class of "permutation-invariant" functions. A partial function $f:\{0,1\}^n \times \{0,1\}^n\to \{0,1,?\}$ is permutation-invariant if for every bijection $\pi:\{1,\ldots,n\} \to \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and every $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in \{0,1\}^n$, it is the case that $f(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = f(\mathbf{x}^{\pi}, \mathbf{y}^{\pi})$. Most of the commonly studied functions in communication complexity are permutation-invariant. For such functions, we present a simple complexity measure (computable in time polynomial in $n$ given an implicit description of $f$) that describes their communication complexity up to polynomial factors and up to an additive error that is logarithmic in the input size. This gives a coarse taxonomy of the communication complexity of simple functions. Our work highlights the role of the well-known lower bounds of functions such as 'Set-Disjointness' and 'Indexing', while complementing them with the relatively lesser-known upper bounds for 'Gap-Inner-Product' (from the sketching literature) and 'Sparse-Gap-Inner-Product' (from the recent work of Canonne et al. [ITCS 2015]). We also present consequences to the study of communication complexity with imperfectly shared randomness where we show that for total permutation-invariant functions, imperfectly shared randomness results in only a polynomial blow-up in communication complexity after an additive $O(\log \log n)$ overhead.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Motivated by the quest for a broader understanding of communication complexity of simple functions, we introduce the class of "permutation-invariant" functions. | contribution 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.03 | asserted 0.95 |
| s1 | A partial function $f:\{0,1\}^n \times \{0,1\}^n\to \{0,1,?\}$ is permutation-invariant if for every bijection $\pi:\{1,\ldots,n\} \to \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and every $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in \{0,1\}^n$, it is the case that $f(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = f(\mathbf{x}^{\pi}, \mathbf{y}^{\pi})$. | contribution 0.78 | 0.30 | 0.03 | asserted 0.98 |
| s2 | Most of the commonly studied functions in communication complexity are permutation-invariant. | background 0.96 | 0.12 | 0.03 | asserted 0.98 |
| s3 | For such functions, we present a simple complexity measure (computable in time polynomial in $n$ given an implicit description of $f$) that describes their communication complexity up to polynomial factors and up to an additive error that is logarithmic in the input size. | contribution 0.54 | 0.95 | 0.74 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | This gives a coarse taxonomy of the communication complexity of simple functions. | interpretation 0.97 | 0.80 | 0.17 | asserted 0.98 |
| s5 | Our work highlights the role of the well-known lower bounds of functions such as 'Set-Disjointness' and 'Indexing', while complementing them with the relatively lesser-known upper bounds for 'Gap-Inner-Product' (from the sketching literature) and 'Sparse-Gap-Inner-Product' (from the recent work of Canonne et al. [ITCS 2015]). | contribution 0.52 | 0.56 | 0.08 | asserted 1.00 |
| s6 | We also present consequences to the study of communication complexity with imperfectly shared randomness where we show that for total permutation-invariant functions, imperfectly shared randomness results in only a polynomial blow-up in communication complexity after an additive $O(\log \log n)$ overhead. | result 0.89 | 0.94 | 0.15 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Motivated by the quest for a broader understanding of communication complexity of simple functions, we introduce the class of "permutation-invariant" functions. A partial function $f:\{0,1\}^n \times \{0,1\}^n\to \{0,1,?\}$ is permutation-invariant if for every bijection $\pi:\{1,\ldots,n\} \to \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and every $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in \{0,1\}^n$, it is the case that $f(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = f(\mathbf{x}^{\pi}, \mathbf{y}^{\pi})$. Most of the commonly studied functions in communication complexity are permutation-invariant. For such functions, we present a simple complexity measure (computable in time polynomial in $n$ given an implicit description of $f$) that describes their communication complexity up to polynomial factors and up to an additive error that is logarithmic in the input size. This gives a coarse taxonomy of the communication complexity of simple functions. Our work highlights the role of the well-known lower bounds of functions such as 'Set-Disjointness' and 'Indexing', while complementing them with the relatively lesser-known upper bounds for 'Gap-Inner-Product' (from the sketching literature) and 'Sparse-Gap-Inner-Product' (from the recent work of Canonne et al. [ITCS 2015]). We also present consequences to the study of communication complexity with imperfectly shared randomness where we show that for total permutation-invariant functions, imperfectly shared randomness results in only a polynomial blow-up in communication complexity after an additive $O(\log \log n)$ overhead.
Human review
References
How the literature uses it
1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence
Papers citing it
Cites it as background 1 paper
-
Shared common randomness, and the generation thereof, has also found additional applications in identification capacity [ref] , communication complexity [ref] , locality-sensitive hashing, [ref] and coding theory [ref] .
Round Complexity of Common Randomness Generation: The Amortized Setting · Introduction · 0.94
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.