Paper detail

Notes on switching lemmas

We prove three switching lemmas, for random restrictions for which variables are set independently; for random restrictions where variables are set in blocks (both due to Hastad [Hastad 86]); and for a distribution appropriate for the bijective pigeonhole principle [Beame et al. 94, Krajicek et al. 95]. The proofs are based on Beame's version [Beame 94] of Razborov's proof of the switching lemma in [Razborov 93], except using families of weighted restrictions rather than families of restrictions which are all the same size. This follows a suggestion of Beame in [Beame 94]. The result is something between Hastad's and Razborov's methods of proof. We use probabilistic arguments rather than counting ones, in a similar way to Hastad, but rather than doing induction on the terms in our formula with an inductive hypothesis involving conditional probability, as Hastad does, we explicitly build one function to bound the probabilities for the whole formula.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.