
arXiv: 1801.07839
There has been a great deal of work establishing that random linear codes are as list-decodable as uniformly random codes, in the sense that a random linear binary code of rate $1 - H(p) - ε$ is $(p,O(1/ε))$-list-decodable with high probability. In this work, we show that such codes are $(p, H(p)/ε+ 2)$-list-decodable with high probability, for any $p \in (0, 1/2)$ and $ε> 0$. In addition to improving the constant in known list-size bounds, our argument, which is quite simple, works simultaneously for all values of $p$, while previous works obtaining $L = O(1/ε)$ patched together different arguments to cover different parameter regimes. Our approach is to strengthen an existential argument of (Guruswami, Håstad, Sudan and Zuckerman, IEEE Trans. IT, 2002) to hold with high probability. To complement our upper bound for random linear codes, we also improve an argument of (Guruswami, Narayanan, IEEE Trans. IT, 2014) to obtain an essentially tight lower bound of $1/ε$ on the list size of uniformly random codes; this implies that random linear codes are in fact more list-decodable than uniformly random codes, in the sense that the list sizes are strictly smaller. To demonstrate the applicability of these techniques, we use them to (a) obtain more information about the distribution of list sizes of random linear codes and (b) to prove a similar result for random linear rank-metric codes.
29 pages
FOS: Computer and information sciences, List-decoding, Random linear codes, Computer Science - Information Theory, Information Theory (cs.IT), Rank-metric codes, 004, ddc: ddc:004
FOS: Computer and information sciences, List-decoding, Random linear codes, Computer Science - Information Theory, Information Theory (cs.IT), Rank-metric codes, 004, ddc: ddc:004
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 8 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
