The Sample Complexity of Smooth Boosting and the Tightness of the Hardcore Theorem
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Smooth boosters generate distributions that do not place too much weight on any given example. Originally introduced for their noise-tolerant properties, such boosters have also found applications in differential privacy, reproducibility, and quantum learning theory. We study and settle the sample complexity of smooth boosting: we exhibit a class that can be weak learned to γ-advantage over smooth distributions with m samples, for which strong learning over the uniform distribution requires tildeOmega(1/γ2)· m samples. This matches the overhead of existing smooth boosters and provides the first separation from the setting of distribution-independent boosting, for which the corresponding overhead is O(1/γ). Our work also sheds new light on Impagliazzo's hardcore theorem from complexity theory, all known proofs of which can be cast in the framework of smooth boosting. For a function f that is mildly hard against size-s circuits, the hardcore theorem provides a set of inputs on which f is extremely hard against size-s' circuits. A downside of this important result is the loss in circuit size, i.e. that s' ll s. Answering a question of Trevisan, we show that this size loss is necessary and in fact, the parameters achieved by known proofs are the best possible.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2024.
Builds on
6 of 59 references.
References · 6
- 2022Reproducibility in Learningcited by 44
- 2023Complexity-Theoretic Implications of Multicalibrationcited by 16
- 2020Efficient, Noise-Tolerant, and Private Learning via Boostingcited by 15
- 2022Optimal Weak to Strong Learningcited by 14
- 2021Boosting in the Presence of Massart Noisecited by 10
- 2020Improved Quantum Boostingcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
2 papers.