Paper detail

Adaptive group testing as channel coding with feedback

Group testing is the combinatorial problem of identifying the defective items in a population by grouping items into test pools. Recently, nonadaptive group testing - where all the test pools must be decided on at the start - has been studied from an information theory point of view. Using techniques from channel coding, upper and lower bounds have been given on the number of tests required to accurately recover the defective set, even when the test outcomes can be noisy. In this paper, we give the first information theoretic result on adaptive group testing - where the outcome of previous tests can influence the makeup of future tests. We show that adaptive testing does not help much, as the number of tests required obeys the same lower bound as nonadaptive testing. Our proof uses similar techniques to the proof that feedback does not improve channel capacity.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.