Is it easier to count communities than find them?
summary
Defines a planted dense submatrix model with additive Gaussian noise and studies testing between one planted community and M planted communities (the count 1 vs M problem). Main claims: a degree‑1 diagonal sum test separates cases when Mλk vs λk concentrates, a signed‑triangle statistic handles the binary graph case, and low‑degree polynomial lower bounds (degree up to O(log n)) match recovery thresholds, so counting is as hard as recovery in the same parameter regimes.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (14)
- 0:00Introduction
- 0:35The model
- 1:35Phase diagrams
- 2:24Mplanted communities
- 4:32Formal Statement
- 5:58Hardness
- 7:20Binary model
- 8:07No diagonal entries
- 9:37Reduction
- 11:32No guarantee
- 11:51Calculating sum
- 12:52Determining sum
- 13:41Print techniques
- 15:18R structure
related talks
25mFundamental Limit of Community Detection in Stochastic Block Models
35mLocal Statistics, Semidefinite Programming, and Community Detection II
47mPhase Transitions in Semidefinite Relaxations (A Fast & Robust Algorithm for Community Detection)
39mLocal Algorithms for Community Detection
11mUnderstanding Statistical-to-Computational Gaps via Low-Degree Polynomials
45mCorrelated Stochastic Block Models: Graph Matching And Community Recovery
43mInformation-Theoretic Bounds and Phase Transitions in Community Detection and High-Dimensional Clust
25mLucky Talk: From Coding to Clustering
