Learning a predictor from sampled descriptions #
Validation samples a labeled source example and its weight coin. On acceptance it checks the prediction; otherwise it returns a fresh fair bit. The resulting acceptance probability measures weighted prediction bias without rejection sampling. Candidate generation and validation remain ordinary probabilistic programs with separately synthesized strict PPT certificates.
Main definitions #
weightedTrial: validate a weighted example with a fair rejection branch.learn: sample both predictor orientations and select by empirical score.
Main results #
learn_goodPredictor_error_pow: the concrete learner meets the boosting correlation contract.learn_length_le: every returned description has the charged size, even on failed trials.isPPTOn_learn: certify the complete learner through shared program combinators.
References #
- Thomas Holenstein, Key Agreement from Weak Bit Agreement, STOC 2005, Section 2.2, the uniform hard-core construction and its learner calls. [Hol05].
- Thomas Holenstein, Pseudorandom Generators from One-Way Functions: A Simple Construction for Any Hardness, TCC 2006, Section 5, the prediction reduction following Game 5. [Hol06]. The weighted validation and explicit candidate selection implement the learner for our fresh-mask version of the reduction.
Adapted from the cslib crypto branch at
5ff69ca93402e7c947208dc56396d6d86203ccd8, using typed tidy-machine certificates.
Weighted validation is strict PPT, including examples on which the weight coin fails.
Saved predictor randomness can be sampled before or after the validation example and weight coin. Thus validation measures the original randomized predictor's weighted bias.
Complementing the trial negates its weighted bias. The rejected branch remains fair.
Either sign of an average validation bias supplies a noticeable chance of drawing a positively biased signed candidate. The sign choice is made by the program's fair coin.
An inverse-polynomial average validation bias, of either sign, yields a positively biased predictor except with an explicit exponentially small discovery-and-selection error.
The selected orientation is used by the final predictor, and its validation rate is the same rate estimated during learning.
The learned deterministic predictor has positive weighted correlation. The advantage hypothesis concerns the original candidate distribution, before choosing an orientation.
Each orientation adds exactly one bit, and empirical selection preserves this bound even when its statistical tests fail. The empty fallback also satisfies it.
The concrete learner meets the boosting loop's contract for the truncated description.
Its validation mask is the current soft weight, and its target correlation covers gamma.
The remaining cryptographic premise is the candidate distribution's noticeable validation bias.
Adding a random orientation preserves the sampler's strict PPT certificate.
Validation of signed descriptions is strict PPT for any supplied efficient trial.
Reading the orientation and running the saved evaluator remains deterministic polynomial time on every description, including malformed or truncated ones.
The complete learner is strict PPT in its input, confidence, and inverse bias parameters.