Abstract

It was recently proved in Alon et al. (2017) that any hereditary property of two-dimensional matrices (where the row and column order is not ignored) over a finite alphabet is testable with a constant number of queries, by establishing the following ordered matrix removal lemma: For any finite alphabet Γ, any hereditary property $\mathcal {P}$ of matrices over Γ, and any 𝜖 > 0, there exists $f_{\mathcal {P}}(\epsilon )$ such that for any matrix M over Γ that is 𝜖-far from satisfying $\mathcal {P}$, most of the $f_{\mathcal {P}}(\epsilon ) \times f_{\mathcal {P}}(\epsilon )$ submatrices of M do not satisfy $\mathcal {P}$. Here being 𝜖-far from $\mathcal {P}$ means that one needs to modify at least an 𝜖-fraction of the entries of M to make it satisfy $\mathcal {P}$. However, in the above general removal lemma, $f_{\mathcal {P}}(\epsilon )$ grows very quickly as a function of 𝜖− 1, even when $\mathcal {P}$ is characterized by a single forbidden submatrix. In this work we establish much more efficient removal lemmas for several special cases of the above problem. In particular, we show the following, which can be seen as an efficient binary matrix analogue of the triangle removal lemma: For any fixed s × t binary matrix A and any 𝜖 > 0 there exists δ > 0 polynomial in 𝜖, such that for any binary matrix M in which less than a δ-fraction of the s × t submatrices are equal to A, there exists a set of less than an 𝜖-fraction of the entries of M that intersects every copy of A in M. We generalize the work of Alon et al. (2007) and make progress towards proving one of their conjectures. The proofs combine their efficient conditional regularity lemma for matrices with additional combinatorial and probabilistic ideas.

Highlights

  • Removal lemmas are structural combinatorial results that relate the density of “forbidden” substructures in a given large structure S with the distance of S from not containing any of the forbidden substructures, stating that if S contains a small number of forbidden substructures, one can make S free of such substructures by making only a small number of modifications in it

  • A natural motivation for the investigation of removal lemmas comes from property testing

  • If an n × n binary matrix M contains n2 pairwise-disjoint copies of an s × t binary matrix A, the total number of A-copies in M is at least δns+t, where δ−1 is polynomial in −1

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Removal lemmas are structural combinatorial results that relate the density of “forbidden” substructures in a given large structure S with the distance of S from not containing any of the forbidden substructures, stating that if S contains a small number of forbidden substructures, one can make S free of such substructures by making only a small number of modifications in it. It is natural to ask for which hereditary matrix properties P there exist removal lemmas with more reasonable upper bounds on fP ( ), and to identify large families of properties P for which fP ( ) is polynomial in −1. A natural motivation for the investigation of removal lemmas comes from property testing This active field of study in computer science, initiated by Rubinfeld and Sudan [23] (see [18] for the graph case), is dedicated to finding fast algorithms to distinguish between objects that satisfy a certain property and objects that are far from satisfying this property; these algorithms are called testers. Any hereditary property of matrices is testable by Theorem 1, while any property P for which fP ( ) is shown to be polynomial in −1 is testable

Background and main results
Related work
Notation
Folding and unfoldable matrices
Proofs for the binary case
Multi-dimensional matrices over arbitrary alphabets
Lower bound
Concluding remarks
A Proof of Theorem 16
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.