End-to-End Error-Correcting Codes on Networks with Worst-Case Symbol Errors

The problem of coding for networks experiencing worst-case symbol errors is considered. We argue that this is a reasonable model for highly dynamic wireless network transmissions. We demonstrate that in this setup prior network error-correcting schemes can be arbitrarily far from achieving the optimal network throughput. A new transform metric for errors under the considered model is proposed. Using this metric, we replicate many of the classical results from coding theory. Specifically, we prove new Hamming-type, Plotkin-type, and Elias-Bassalygo-type upper bounds on the network capacity. A commensurate lower bound is shown based on Gilbert-Varshamov-type codes for error-correction. The GV codes used to attain the lower bound can be non-coherent, that is, they do not require prior knowledge of the network topology. We also propose a computationally-efficient concatenation scheme. The rate achieved by our concatenated codes is characterized by a Zyablov-type lower bound. We provide a generalized minimum-distance decoding algorithm which decodes up to half the minimum distance of the concatenated codes. The end-to-end nature of our design enables our codes to be overlaid on the classical distributed random linear network codes [1]. Furthermore, the potentially intensive computation at internal nodes for the link-by-link error-correction is un-necessary based on our design.Comment: Submitted for publication. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1108.239

File Updates Under Random/Arbitrary Insertions And Deletions

A client/encoder edits a file, as modeled by an insertion-deletion (InDel) process. An old copy of the file is stored remotely at a data-centre/decoder, and is also available to the client. We consider the problem of throughput- and computationally-efficient communication from the client to the data-centre, to enable the server to update its copy to the newly edited file. We study two models for the source files/edit patterns: the random pre-edit sequence left-to-right random InDel (RPES-LtRRID) process, and the arbitrary pre-edit sequence arbitrary InDel (APES-AID) process. In both models, we consider the regime in which the number of insertions/deletions is a small (but constant) fraction of the original file. For both models we prove information-theoretic lower bounds on the best possible compression rates that enable file updates. Conversely, our compression algorithms use dynamic programming (DP) and entropy coding, and achieve rates that are approximately optimal.Comment: The paper is an extended version of our paper to be appeared at ITW 201

A Comparative Research on Competitiveness of Information Industry of China vs. Korea

This paper explores the competitiveness of information industry of China and Korea by means of comparative research based on the analysis of statistic data and the definition of items denoting the competitiveness. Consequently, we analyze the competitive and complementary relation of information industry of China vs. Korea, and put forward a co-operation project of China-Korea information industry ultimately

The Capacity of Private Information Retrieval with Eavesdroppers

We consider the problem of private information retrieval (PIR) with colluding servers and eavesdroppers (abbreviated as ETPIR). The ETPIR problem is comprised of $K$ messages, $N$ servers where each server stores all $K$ messages, a user who wants to retrieve one of the $K$ messages without revealing the desired message index to any set of $T$ colluding servers, and an eavesdropper who can listen to the queries and answers of any $E$ servers but is prevented from learning any information about the messages. The information theoretic capacity of ETPIR is defined to be the maximum number of desired message symbols retrieved privately per information symbol downloaded. We show that the capacity of ETPIR is $C = \left( 1- \frac{E}{N} \right) \left(1 + \frac{T-E}{N-E} + \cdots + \left( \frac{T-E}{N-E} \right)^{K-1} \right)^{-1}$ when $E < T$, and $C = \left( 1 - \frac{E}{N} \right)$ when $E \geq T$. To achieve the capacity, the servers need to share a common random variable (independent of the messages), and its size must be at least $\frac{E}{N} \cdot \frac{1}{C}$ symbols per message symbol. Otherwise, with less amount of shared common randomness, ETPIR is not feasible and the capacity reduces to zero. An interesting observation is that the ETPIR capacity expression takes different forms in two regimes. When $E < T$, the capacity equals the inverse of a sum of a geometric series with $K$ terms and decreases with $K$; this form is typical for capacity expressions of PIR. When $E \geq T$, the capacity does not depend on $K$, a typical form for capacity expressions of SPIR (symmetric PIR, which further requires data-privacy, {\it i.e.,} the user learns no information about other undesired messages); the capacity does not depend on $T$ either. In addition, the ETPIR capacity result includes multiple previous PIR and SPIR capacity results as special cases

On Gap-dependent Bounds for Offline Reinforcement Learning

This paper presents a systematic study on gap-dependent sample complexity in offline reinforcement learning. Prior work showed when the density ratio between an optimal policy and the behavior policy is upper bounded (the optimal policy coverage assumption), then the agent can achieve an $O\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon^2}\right)$ rate, which is also minimax optimal. We show under the optimal policy coverage assumption, the rate can be improved to $O\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon}\right)$ when there is a positive sub-optimality gap in the optimal $Q$-function. Furthermore, we show when the visitation probabilities of the behavior policy are uniformly lower bounded for states where an optimal policy's visitation probabilities are positive (the uniform optimal policy coverage assumption), the sample complexity of identifying an optimal policy is independent of $\frac{1}{\epsilon}$. Lastly, we present nearly-matching lower bounds to complement our gap-dependent upper bounds.Comment: 33 pages, 1 figure, submitted to NeurIPS 202