Construction of Almost Disjunct Matrices for Group Testing

In a \emph{group testing} scheme, a set of tests is designed to identify a small number $t$ of defective items among a large set (of size $N$) of items. In the non-adaptive scenario the set of tests has to be designed in one-shot. In this setting, designing a testing scheme is equivalent to the construction of a \emph{disjunct matrix}, an $M \times N$ matrix where the union of supports of any $t$ columns does not contain the support of any other column. In principle, one wants to have such a matrix with minimum possible number $M$ of rows (tests). One of the main ways of constructing disjunct matrices relies on \emph{constant weight error-correcting codes} and their \emph{minimum distance}. In this paper, we consider a relaxed definition of a disjunct matrix known as \emph{almost disjunct matrix}. This concept is also studied under the name of \emph{weakly separated design} in the literature. The relaxed definition allows one to come up with group testing schemes where a close-to-one fraction of all possible sets of defective items are identifiable. Our main contribution is twofold. First, we go beyond the minimum distance analysis and connect the \emph{average distance} of a constant weight code to the parameters of an almost disjunct matrix constructed from it. Our second contribution is to explicitly construct almost disjunct matrices based on our average distance analysis, that have much smaller number of rows than any previous explicit construction of disjunct matrices. The parameters of our construction can be varied to cover a large range of relations for $t$ and $N$.Comment: 15 Page

Derandomization and Group Testing

The rapid development of derandomization theory, which is a fundamental area in theoretical computer science, has recently led to many surprising applications outside its initial intention. We will review some recent such developments related to combinatorial group testing. In its most basic setting, the aim of group testing is to identify a set of "positive" individuals in a population of items by taking groups of items and asking whether there is a positive in each group. In particular, we will discuss explicit constructions of optimal or nearly-optimal group testing schemes using "randomness-conducting" functions. Among such developments are constructions of error-correcting group testing schemes using randomness extractors and condensers, as well as threshold group testing schemes from lossless condensers.Comment: Invited Paper in Proceedings of 48th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, 201

Superselectors: Efficient Constructions and Applications

We introduce a new combinatorial structure: the superselector. We show that superselectors subsume several important combinatorial structures used in the past few years to solve problems in group testing, compressed sensing, multi-channel conflict resolution and data security. We prove close upper and lower bounds on the size of superselectors and we provide efficient algorithms for their constructions. Albeit our bounds are very general, when they are instantiated on the combinatorial structures that are particular cases of superselectors (e.g., (p,k,n)-selectors, (d,\ell)-list-disjunct matrices, MUT_k(r)-families, FUT(k, a)-families, etc.) they match the best known bounds in terms of size of the structures (the relevant parameter in the applications). For appropriate values of parameters, our results also provide the first efficient deterministic algorithms for the construction of such structures

Improved Combinatorial Group Testing Algorithms for Real-World Problem Sizes

We study practically efficient methods for performing combinatorial group testing. We present efficient non-adaptive and two-stage combinatorial group testing algorithms, which identify the at most d items out of a given set of n items that are defective, using fewer tests for all practical set sizes. For example, our two-stage algorithm matches the information theoretic lower bound for the number of tests in a combinatorial group testing regimen.Comment: 18 pages; an abbreviated version of this paper is to appear at the 9th Worksh. Algorithms and Data Structure