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

Diptaksho Palit

dblp:419/6421 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0001-8673-0332ORCID · corroborated

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

Theory of computation · 2 · 2 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
2 papers
Computational complexity · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational complexity
property testing
2.022026
Computational Complexity in Property Testing · SODA 2026
Relative-Error Unateness Testing · ICALP 2026
Computational complexity › property testing
boolean function testing
1.012026
Relative-Error Unateness Testing · ICALP 2026
Computational complexity › structural complexity
hierarchy theorems
1.012026
Computational Complexity in Property Testing · SODA 2026
Computational complexity
lower bounds
1.012026
Relative-Error Unateness Testing · ICALP 2026
Computational complexity › property testing
property testing lower bounds
1.012026
Relative-Error Unateness Testing · ICALP 2026
Computational complexity › property testing › boolean function testing
unateness testing
1.012026
Relative-Error Unateness Testing · ICALP 2026
Computational complexity
fine-grained complexity
0.312026
Computational Complexity in Property Testing · SODA 2026
Computational complexity › fine-grained complexity
strong exponential time hypothesis
0.312026
Computational Complexity in Property Testing · SODA 2026

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

lower bound arguments · 1.0information-theoretic techniques · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Relative-Error Unateness Testing
abstract
The model of relative-error property testing of Boolean functions has been the subject of significant recent research effort [X. Chen et al., 2025; Chen et al., 2025; Chen et al., 2025]. In this paper we consider the problem of relative-error testing an unknown and arbitrary f: {0,1}ⁿ → {0,1} for the property of being a unate function, i.e. a function that is either monotone non-increasing or monotone non-decreasing in each of the n input variables. Our first result is a one-sided non-adaptive algorithm for this problem that makes Õ(log(N)/ε) samples and queries, where N = |f^{-1}(1)| is the number of satisfying assignments of the function that is being tested and the value of N is given as an input parameter to the algorithm. Building on this algorithm, we next give a one-sided adaptive algorithm for this problem that does not need to be given the value of N and with high probability makes Õ(log(N)/ε) samples and queries. We also give lower bounds for both adaptive and non-adaptive two-sided algorithms that are given the value of N up to a constant multiplicative factor. In the non-adaptive case, our lower bounds essentially match the complexity of the algorithm that we provide.
Xi Chen 0001, Diptaksho Palit, Kabir Peshawaria, William Pires, Rocco A. Servedio
ICALP2
2026 Computational Complexity in Property Testing
abstract
We initiate a systematic study of the computational complexity of property testing, focusing on the relationship between query and time complexity. While traditional work in property testing has emphasized query complexity—often via information-theoretic techniques—relatively little is known about the computational hardness of property testers. Our goal is to chart the landscape of time-query interplay and develop tools for proving time complexity lower bounds. Our first contribution is a pair of time-query hierarchy theorems for property testing. For all suitable nondecreasing functions \(q(n)\) and \(t(n)\) with \(t(n) \ge q(n)\), we construct properties with query complexity \(\tilde \Theta(q(n))\) and time complexity \(\tilde \Omega(t(n))\). Our weak hierarchy holds unconditionally, whereas the strong version—assuming the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis— provides better control over the time complexity of the constructed properties.
Renato Ferreira Pinto Junior, Diptaksho Palit, Sofya Raskhodnikova
SODA2