Progress of hard-core boosting #
We average the scalar potential inequalities over a finite source. A predictor with weighted
correlation at least γ decreases the average potential by γδ / 2 when the weight density is
at least δ. Moving the threshold costs slightly less than δ + γδ / 2 under the loop guards.
Together these give progress of at least γδ² / 8 per iteration after charging for the shift.
The statements allow any finite source distribution. The write-up uses a uniform source. Margins and votes are real-valued in this analysis; integer vote counts and their efficient representation are separate implementation obligations.
Main definitions #
Cslib.Crypto.Pseudoentropy.Boosting.density: source-averaged soft weight.Cslib.Crypto.Pseudoentropy.Boosting.averagePotential: source-averaged scalar potential.
Main results #
Cslib.Crypto.Pseudoentropy.Boosting.step_progress: amortized progress of one valid round.Cslib.Crypto.Pseudoentropy.Boosting.dense_margin_of_iterations: a dense-set guarantee at the finite clock boundary, including equality.Cslib.Crypto.Pseudoentropy.Boosting.clock_sufficient: a polynomial clock from inverse bounds.
References #
The hard-core boosting argument of Holenstein, Section 2.2, Figure 2, Claims 2.7 and
2.10–2.13, and Lemma 2.14. Adapted from the cslib crypto branch at
5ff69ca93402e7c947208dc56396d6d86203ccd8, with arbitrary finite sources and soft dense sets.
Increasing the threshold restores the density present before the preceding vote. Together with the no-shift guard, this proves the density invariant of Claim 2.7.
The initial average potential is the area of the triangular weight curve.
A predictor with correlation γ on a δ-dense measure gives the decrease in Claim 2.10.
The correlation hypothesis is unnormalized, so it remains meaningful without division by density.
The threshold guard and the failure of the stopping test give the cost in Claim 2.11.
One loop iteration decreases the potential after charging δ for an optional threshold
increase. The guard allows either decision when the estimates' tolerance intervals overlap.
A low potential forces a large signed margin on every dense soft set. This form of Claim 2.13 uses soft sets and arbitrary finite sources, avoiding any rounding of set sizes.
Once the accumulated decrease pays for the initial potential, every δ-dense soft set
has average signed margin at least that decrease. At steps rounds with decrease γδ² / 8,
this gives average correctness at least 1 / 2 + γδ² / 16, sufficient for the stopping test.
Unlike a strict negativity argument, this includes an exact equality at the clock boundary.
A clocked sequence of valid progress steps has a positive average margin on every dense soft set. The hypotheses describe the analysis of a run; they do not assume that its choices or stopping tests have already been implemented efficiently.
The clock condition is steps * γ² * δ³ ≥ 4. For positive integer inverse bounds, a sufficient
clock is 4 * inverseGamma² * inverseDelta³ when γ ≥ 1 / inverseGamma and δ ≥ 1 / inverseDelta.
At the clock boundary the average correctness over the predictors is at least
1 / 2 + γδ² / 16, once signed vote counts are divided by the number of steps.