Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 79 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 25 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 99 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 199 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 444 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

A New Minimax Theorem for Randomized Algorithms (2002.10802v2)

Published 25 Feb 2020 in cs.CC and quant-ph

Abstract: The celebrated minimax principle of Yao (1977) says that for any Boolean-valued function $f$ with finite domain, there is a distribution $\mu$ over the domain of $f$ such that computing $f$ to error $\epsilon$ against inputs from $\mu$ is just as hard as computing $f$ to error $\epsilon$ on worst-case inputs. Notably, however, the distribution $\mu$ depends on the target error level $\epsilon$: the hard distribution which is tight for bounded error might be trivial to solve to small bias, and the hard distribution which is tight for a small bias level might be far from tight for bounded error levels. In this work, we introduce a new type of minimax theorem which can provide a hard distribution $\mu$ that works for all bias levels at once. We show that this works for randomized query complexity, randomized communication complexity, some randomized circuit models, quantum query and communication complexities, approximate polynomial degree, and approximate logrank. We also prove an improved version of Impagliazzo's hardcore lemma. Our proofs rely on two innovations over the classical approach of using Von Neumann's minimax theorem or linear programming duality. First, we use Sion's minimax theorem to prove a minimax theorem for ratios of bilinear functions representing the cost and score of algorithms. Second, we introduce a new way to analyze low-bias randomized algorithms by viewing them as "forecasting algorithms" evaluated by a proper scoring rule. The expected score of the forecasting version of a randomized algorithm appears to be a more fine-grained way of analyzing the bias of the algorithm. We show that such expected scores have many elegant mathematical properties: for example, they can be amplified linearly instead of quadratically. We anticipate forecasting algorithms will find use in future work in which a fine-grained analysis of small-bias algorithms is required.

Citations (12)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.