Paper detail

Statistical and Computational Phase Transitions in Group Testing

We study the group testing problem where the goal is to identify a set of k infected individuals carrying a rare disease within a population of size n, based on the outcomes of pooled tests which return positive whenever there is at least one infected individual in the tested group. We consider two different simple random procedures for assigning individuals to tests: the constant-column design and Bernoulli design. Our first set of results concerns the fundamental statistical limits. For the constant-column design, we give a new information-theoretic lower bound which implies that the proportion of correctly identifiable infected individuals undergoes a sharp "all-or-nothing" phase transition when the number of tests crosses a particular threshold. For the Bernoulli design, we determine the precise number of tests required to solve the associated detection problem (where the goal is to distinguish between a group testing instance and pure noise), improving both the upper and lower bounds of Truong, Aldridge, and Scarlett (2020). For both group testing models, we also study the power of computationally efficient (polynomial-time) inference procedures. We determine the precise number of tests required for the class of low-degree polynomial algorithms to solve the detection problem. This provides evidence for an inherent computational-statistical gap in both the detection and recovery problems at small sparsity levels. Notably, our evidence is contrary to that of Iliopoulos and Zadik (2021), who predicted the absence of a computational-statistical gap in the Bernoulli design.

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.