Paper detail

The Round Complexity of Small Set Intersection

The set disjointness problem is one of the most fundamental and well-studied problems in communication complexity. In this problem Alice and Bob hold sets $S, T \subseteq [n]$, respectively, and the goal is to decide if $S \cap T = \emptyset$. Reductions from set disjointness are a canonical way of proving lower bounds in data stream algorithms, data structures, and distributed computation. In these applications, often the set sizes $|S|$ and $|T|$ are bounded by a value $k$ which is much smaller than $n$. This is referred to as small set disjointness. A major restriction in the above applications is the number of rounds that the protocol can make, which, e.g., translates to the number of passes in streaming applications. A fundamental question is thus in understanding the round complexity of the small set disjointness problem. For an essentially equivalent problem, called OR-Equality, Brody et. al showed that with $r$ rounds of communication, the randomized communication complexity is $Ω(k \ilog^r k)$, where$\ilog^r k$ denotes the $r$-th iterated logarithm function. Unfortunately their result requires the error probability of the protocol to be $1/k^{Θ(1)}$. Since naïve amplification of the success probability of a protocol from constant to $1-1/k^{Θ(1)}$ blows up the communication by a $Θ(\log k)$ factor, this destroys their improvements over the well-known lower bound of $Ω(k)$ which holds for any number of rounds. They pose it as an open question to achieve the same $Ω(k \ilog^r k)$ lower bound for protocols with constant error probability. We answer this open question by showing that the $r$-round randomized communication complexity of ${\sf OREQ}_{n,k}$, and thus also of small set disjointness, with {\it constant error probability} is $Ω(k \ilog^r k)$, asymptotically matching known upper bounds for ${\sf OREQ}_{n,k}$ and small set disjointness.

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.