Paper detail

Decision Trees, Protocols, and the Fourier Entropy-Influence Conjecture

Given $f:\{-1, 1\}^n \rightarrow \{-1, 1\}$, define the \emph{spectral distribution} of $f$ to be the distribution on subsets of $[n]$ in which the set $S$ is sampled with probability $\widehat{f}(S)^2$. Then the Fourier Entropy-Influence (FEI) conjecture of Friedgut and Kalai (1996) states that there is some absolute constant $C$ such that $\operatorname{H}[\widehat{f}^2] \leq C\cdot\operatorname{Inf}[f]$. Here, $\operatorname{H}[\widehat{f}^2]$ denotes the Shannon entropy of $f$'s spectral distribution, and $\operatorname{Inf}[f]$ is the total influence of $f$. This conjecture is one of the major open problems in the analysis of Boolean functions, and settling it would have several interesting consequences. Previous results on the FEI conjecture have been largely through direct calculation. In this paper we study a natural interpretation of the conjecture, which states that there exists a communication protocol which, given subset $S$ of $[n]$ distributed as $\widehat{f}^2$, can communicate the value of $S$ using at most $C\cdot\operatorname{Inf}[f]$ bits in expectation. Using this interpretation, we are able show the following results: 1. First, if $f$ is computable by a read-$k$ decision tree, then $\operatorname{H}[\widehat{f}^2] \leq 9k\cdot \operatorname{Inf}[f]$. 2. Next, if $f$ has $\operatorname{Inf}[f] \geq 1$ and is computable by a decision tree with expected depth $d$, then $\operatorname{H}[\widehat{f}^2] \leq 12d\cdot \operatorname{Inf}[f]$. 3. Finally, we give a new proof of the main theorem of O'Donnell and Tan (ICALP 2013), i.e. that their FEI$^+$ conjecture composes. In addition, we show that natural improvements to our decision tree results would be sufficient to prove the FEI conjecture in its entirety. We believe that our methods give more illuminating proofs than previous results about the FEI conjecture.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.