Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Noam Peri

dblp:278/1859 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Graph algorithms and graph theory · 75% Computational complexity · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Graph algorithms and graph theory
expander graphs
0.512021
Expander random walks: a Fourier-analytic approach · STOC 2021
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph algorithms
0.512021
Expander random walks: a Fourier-analytic approach · STOC 2021
Computational complexity
pseudorandomness
0.512021
Expander random walks: a Fourier-analytic approach · STOC 2021
Graph algorithms and graph theory › expander graphs
random walks on expanders
0.512021
Expander random walks: a Fourier-analytic approach · STOC 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

fourier analysis · 0.5expander graphs · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Expander random walks: a Fourier-analytic approach
abstract
In this work we ask the following basic question: assume the vertices of an expander graph are labelled by 0,1. What “test” functions f : { 0,1}t → {0,1} cannot distinguish t independent samples from those obtained by a random walk? The expander hitting property due to Ajtai, Komlos and Szemeredi (STOC 1987) is captured by the AND test function, whereas the fundamental expander Chernoff bound due to Gillman (SICOMP 1998), Heally (Computational Complexity 2008) is about test functions indicating whether the weight is close to the mean. In fact, it is known that all threshold functions are fooled by a random walk (Kipnis and Varadhan, Communications in Mathematical Physics 1986). Recently, it was shown that even the highly sensitive PARITY function is fooled by a random walk Ta-Shma (STOC 2017).
Gil Cohen, Noam Peri, Amnon Ta-Shma
STOC2