Testing Intersecting and Union-Closed Families

Abstract

Inspired by the classic problem of Boolean function monotonicity testing, we investigate the testability of other well-studied properties of combinatorial finite set systems, specifically intersecting families and union-closed families. A function f: \0,1\n \0,1\ is intersecting (respectively, union-closed) if its set of satisfying assignments corresponds to an intersecting family (respectively, a union-closed family) of subsets of [n]. Our main results are that -- in sharp contrast with the property of being a monotone set system -- the property of being an intersecting set system, and the property of being a union-closed set system, both turn out to be information-theoretically difficult to test. We show that: For ε ≥ (1/n), any non-adaptive two-sided ε-tester for intersectingness must make 2(n1/4/ε) queries. We also give a 2(n (1/ε))-query lower bound for non-adaptive one-sided ε-testers for intersectingness. For ε ≥ 1/2(n0.49), any non-adaptive two-sided ε-tester for union-closedness must make n((1/ε)) queries. Thus, neither intersectingness nor union-closedness shares the poly(n,1/ε)-query non-adaptive testability that is enjoyed by monotonicity. To complement our lower bounds, we also give a simple poly(nn(1/ε),1/ε)-query, one-sided, non-adaptive algorithm for ε-testing each of these properties (intersectingness and union-closedness). We thus achieve nearly tight upper and lower bounds for two-sided testing of intersectingness when ε = (1/n), and for one-sided testing of intersectingness when ε=(1).

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…