{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2024:JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP","short_pith_number":"pith:JLFLVZM7","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"4acabae59f2917cefa9be5fba7daba5bebe114d3fb684b68d08fb83becd1af50","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2403.03295","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Proper vs Improper Quantum PAC learning","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CC","cs.LG"],"primary_cat":"quant-ph","authors_text":"Ashwin Nayak, Pulkit Sinha","submitted_at":"2024-03-05T19:49:44Z","abstract_excerpt":"A basic question in the PAC model of learning is whether proper learning is harder than improper learning. In the classical case, there are examples of concept classes with VC dimension $d$ that have sample complexity $\\Omega\\left(\\frac d\\epsilon\\log\\frac1\\epsilon\\right)$ for proper learning with error $\\epsilon$, while the complexity for improper learning is O$\\!\\left(\\frac d\\epsilon\\right)$. One such example arises from the Coupon Collector problem.\n  Motivated by the efficiency of proper versus improper learning with quantum samples, Arunachalam, Belovs, Childs, Kothari, Rosmanis, and de Wo"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2403.03295","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"quant-ph","submitted_at":"2024-03-05T19:49:44Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.CC","cs.LG"],"title_canon_sha256":"1aebd5bf534f7df08999aed03d673f2e6ae7105e40c1a1b299bee1a7aa7f3d25","abstract_canon_sha256":"6b37bc61d6940b3dfd39f25ce288bb43deae5179da63aa23bfbe8c6f97dbc771"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290537Z","signature_b64":"ur1vpRg+PxE5DgXI56TOB37FAwvonbwawnP8pt7VJHYqdTbL24D6CC0hURgDQhjZtWryQ1J9/5A+fwnqnjcXDA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"4acabae59f2917cefa9be5fba7daba5bebe114d3fb684b68d08fb83becd1af50","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.289963Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.289963Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Proper vs Improper Quantum PAC learning","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CC","cs.LG"],"primary_cat":"quant-ph","authors_text":"Ashwin Nayak, Pulkit Sinha","submitted_at":"2024-03-05T19:49:44Z","abstract_excerpt":"A basic question in the PAC model of learning is whether proper learning is harder than improper learning. In the classical case, there are examples of concept classes with VC dimension $d$ that have sample complexity $\\Omega\\left(\\frac d\\epsilon\\log\\frac1\\epsilon\\right)$ for proper learning with error $\\epsilon$, while the complexity for improper learning is O$\\!\\left(\\frac d\\epsilon\\right)$. One such example arises from the Coupon Collector problem.\n  Motivated by the efficiency of proper versus improper learning with quantum samples, Arunachalam, Belovs, Childs, Kothari, Rosmanis, and de Wo"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2403.03295","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2403.03295/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2403.03295","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2403.03295v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2403.03295","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"JLFLVZM7FEL4","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"JLFLVZM7FEL456U3","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"JLFLVZM7","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2508.21369","citing_title":"Quantum Learning with Tunable Loss Functions","ref_index":40,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP","json":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/JLFLVZM7"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/JLFLVZM7","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2403.03295&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/JLFLVZM7FEL456U34X52PWV2LP/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T07:52:46.290041+00:00"}