7 research outputs found

    On Obtaining Pseudorandomness from Error-Correcting Codes

    Get PDF
    A number of recent results have constructed randomness extractors and pseudorandom generators (PRGs) directly from certain error-correcting codes. The underlying construction in these results amounts to picking a random index into the codeword and outputting m consecutive symbols (the codeword is obtained from the weak random source in the case of extractors, and from a hard function in the case of PRGs). We study this construction applied to general cyclic error-correcting codes, with the goal of understanding what pseudorandom objects it can produce. We show that every cyclic code with sufficient distance yields extractors that fool all linear tests. Further, we show that every polynomial code with sufficient distance yields extractors that fool all low-degree prediction tests. These are the first results that apply to univariate (rather than multivariate) polynomial codes, hinting that Reed-Solomon codes may yield good randomness extractors. Our proof technique gives rise to a systematic way of producing unconditional PRGs against restricted classes of tests. In particular, we obtain PRGs fooling all linear tests (which amounts to a construction of ε-biased spaces), and we obtain PRGs fooling all low-degree prediction tests

    On Obtaining Pseudorandomness from Error-Correcting Codes

    Get PDF
    Constructing pseudorandom objects based on codes has been the focus of some recent research. These constructions were based on specific algebraic codes and were rather simple in their structure in that a random index into a codeword was picked and mm subsequent symbols output. In this work, we explore the question of whether it is possible to extend the scope of application of this paradigm of constructions to larger families of codes. We show in this work that there exist such pseudorandom objects based on cyclic, linear codes that fool linear tests. When restricted to just algebraic codes, our techniques yield constructions that fool low-degree tests. Specifically, our results show that Reed-Solomon codes can be used to obtain pseudorandom objects, albeit in a weakened form. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first instance of Reed-Solomon codes being used to this effect. In the process, we also touch upon one of the holy grails of derandomization. It should come as no surprise that pseudorandom objects that fool low-degree tests are automatically correlated to derandomizing polynomial identity testing. We look at whether our constructions are general enough to answer this important question and while we come up short in our endeavor, we believe our approach adds a new perspective to this problem and hopefully a meaningful opening to solving it.</p

    On Obtaining Pseudorandomness from Error-Correcting Codes

    No full text
    A number of recent results have constructed randomness extractors and pseudorandom generators (PRGs) directly from certain error-correcting codes. The underlying construction in these results amounts to picking a random index into the codeword and outputting m consecutive symbols (the codeword is obtained from the weak random source in the case of extractors, and from a hard function in the case of PRGs). We study this construction applied to general cyclic error-correcting codes, with the goal of understanding what pseudorandom objects it can produce. We show that every cyclic code with sufficient distance yields extractors that fool all linear tests. Further, we show that every polynomial code with sufficient distance yields extractors that fool all low-degree prediction tests. These are the first results that apply to univariate (rather than multivariate) polynomial codes, hinting that Reed-Solomon codes may yield good randomness extractors. Our proof technique gives rise to a systematic way of producing unconditional PRGs against restricted classes of tests. In particular, we obtain PRGs fooling all linear tests (which amounts to a construction of ε-biased spaces), and we obtain PRGs fooling all low-degree prediction tests
    corecore