Paper detail

GROTESQUE: Noisy Group Testing (Quick and Efficient)

Group-testing refers to the problem of identifying (with high probability) a (small) subset of $D$ defectives from a (large) set of $N$ items via a "small" number of "pooled" tests. For ease of presentation in this work we focus on the regime when $D = \cO{N^{1-\gap}}$ for some $\gap > 0$. The tests may be noiseless or noisy, and the testing procedure may be adaptive (the pool defining a test may depend on the outcome of a previous test), or non-adaptive (each test is performed independent of the outcome of other tests). A rich body of literature demonstrates that $Θ(D\log(N))$ tests are information-theoretically necessary and sufficient for the group-testing problem, and provides algorithms that achieve this performance. However, it is only recently that reconstruction algorithms with computational complexity that is sub-linear in $N$ have started being investigated (recent work by \cite{GurI:04,IndN:10, NgoP:11} gave some of the first such algorithms). In the scenario with adaptive tests with noisy outcomes, we present the first scheme that is simultaneously order-optimal (up to small constant factors) in both the number of tests and the decoding complexity ($\cO{D\log(N)}$ in both the performance metrics). The total number of stages of our adaptive algorithm is "small" ($\cO{\log(D)}$). Similarly, in the scenario with non-adaptive tests with noisy outcomes, we present the first scheme that is simultaneously near-optimal in both the number of tests and the decoding complexity (via an algorithm that requires $\cO{D\log(D)\log(N)}$ tests and has a decoding complexity of {${\cal O}(D(\log N+\log^{2}D))$}. Finally, we present an adaptive algorithm that only requires 2 stages, and for which both the number of tests and the decoding complexity scale as {${\cal O}(D(\log N+\log^{2}D))$}. For all three settings the probability of error of our algorithms scales as $\cO{1/(poly(D)}$.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.