Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Sharp isoperimetric inequalities on the Hamming cube II: The critical exponent

Published 24 Feb 2026 in math.CA, cs.IT, and math.CO | (2602.20462v1)

Abstract: A sharp isoperimetric inequality for the Hamming cube is proved at the critical exponent $β=\frac12$. This follows up on previous work, where such bounds were established for $β$ near $\frac12$. As a consequence, this result settles a conjecture of Kahn and Park on cube partitions and yields a sharp $L1$ Poincaré inequality for Boolean-valued functions. It also confirms a low-noise limit for balanced functions predicted by the Hellinger conjecture on noisy Boolean channels in information theory.

Summary

  • The paper establishes a sharp isoperimetric inequality on the Boolean hypercube at the critical exponent β = 1/2, achieving equality for subcubes.
  • The methodology leverages advanced Bellman function techniques and rigorous computer-assisted interval arithmetic to partition and verify the inequality across multiple cases.
  • The results resolve the Kahn-Park cube-partition conjecture and improve L¹ Poincaré inequalities for Boolean functions, with impactful implications for information theory.

Sharp Isoperimetric Inequalities on the Hamming Cube at the Critical Exponent

Introduction and Main Contributions

The paper "Sharp isoperimetric inequalities on the Hamming cube II: The critical exponent" (2602.20462) establishes the sharp isoperimetric inequality on the Boolean hypercube {0,1}n\{0,1\}^n at the critical exponent β=12\beta=\frac{1}{2}. This critical endpoint addresses a question at the intersection of discrete isoperimetry and concentration of measure, solidifying a conjecture by Kahn and Park concerning partitions of the cube and the fundamental behavior of boundaries associated with sets of given measure under the Hamming metric.

The primary result is that for all subsets A{0,1}nA \subset \{0,1\}^n of size A1/2|A| \leq 1/2, the inequality

EhAAlog2(1/A)\mathbf{E} \sqrt{h_A} \ge |A| \sqrt{\log_2(1/|A|)}

holds, where hA(x)h_A(x) is the vertex degree of xAx \in A into AcA^c. Further, equality is achieved specifically for subcubes, highlighting the sharpness of the bound. The work leverages refined Bellman function methods in conjunction with rigorous computer-assisted inequalities.

Theoretical implications extend to Poincaré-type inequalities for Boolean functions, optimality in problems of Boolean function sensitivity, and confirmation of information-theoretic predictions regarding noisy Boolean channels, specifically a low-noise limit case of the Hellinger conjecture.

Technical Approach

Reduction to Two-Point Inequalities and Bellman Function Construction

Following a modern program initiated by Kahn and Park, the discrete isoperimetric problem is reduced to verifying an explicit two-point inequality for functions B:[0,1][0,)B:[0,1]\to [0,\infty) with specific boundary and interpolation constraints. This recasts the isoperimetric statement as:

G[B](x,y)max{G1[B](x,y),G2[B](x,y)}00xy1,G[B](x,y) \coloneqq \max\left\{ G_1[B](x,y), G_2[B](x,y) \right\} \geq 0 \quad \forall\, 0\leq x \leq y \leq 1,

for carefully constructed G1G_1, G2G_2, related to the Bellman function formalism. The main technical step is the design and verification of a Bellman function Bw1B_{w_1}, piecewise smooth, interpolating between L(x)=xlog2(1/x)L(x)=x\sqrt{\log_2(1/x)} at small xx, an explicit interpolating cubic Q(x)Q(x), and a Gaussian isoperimetric profile scaling Jw(x){\mathrm{J}_w(x)} for x1/2x\geq 1/2.

Sharpness, Extremality, and Endpoint Analysis

The proof establishes both sharpness (equality for subcubes) and the failure of dimension-free bounds for exponents β<1/2\beta < 1/2. Key to this is the collapse of the method for β<1/2\beta < 1/2 (addressed via Hamming ball counterexamples).

The essential verification demands a mix of analytical computation in the regime near criticality (where previous work only established results for β\beta slightly above $1/2$) and interval arithmetic certified via computer-assisted proofs. The approach especially refines the analysis in regimes where the Bellman function transitions between its polynomial and Gaussian regimes. Six case subdivisions (Cases JJ, QQ, LJQLJQ, LJLJ, QJQQJQ, QJQJ) comprehensively partition the space, ensuring all configurations obtain the optimal bound.

Applications and Consequences

Resolution of the Kahn-Park Conjecture

A direct consequence is the resolution of Kahn and Park’s cube-partition conjecture: for any partition (A,B,W)(A,B,W) of the hypercube with A=1/2|A|=1/2, the edge boundary and residue size satisfy

(A,B)+nW1/2,|\nabla(A,B)| + \sqrt{n}|W| \geq 1/2,

which is optimal and achieved when AA is a half-cube and W=W = \emptyset.

Optimal L1L^1 Poincaré Inequality for Boolean Functions

The paper proves for all Boolean functions f:{0,1}n{0,1}f:\{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\},

f1fEf1,\|\nabla f\|_1 \geq \|f - \mathbf{E}f\|_1,

with equality on indicator functions of half-cubes. The bound improves upon prior estimates, surpassing the classical L1L^1 Poincaré constants known for general real-valued functions due to the additional structure for Boolean functions.

Information Theory: Connections to the Hellinger and Courtade-Kumar Conjectures

The sharp isoperimetric bound at β=12\beta=\frac{1}{2} provides, in the balanced case A=1/2|A|=1/2, an explicit verification of the sensitivity inequality

E(sf)1\mathbf{E}(\sqrt{s_f}) \geq 1

for Boolean functions, where sf(x)s_f(x) denotes the sensitivity. This matches predictions from the Hellinger conjecture in information theory, specifically in the low-noise regime for Boolean channels, thereby aligning structural combinatorial inequalities with information-theoretic optimality criteria.

Computational Verification

The proof depends in crucial portions on certified numerical computation, leveraging rigorous interval arithmetic and recursive partitioning (via the FLINT/Arb library) to bound functional expressions arising in the Bellman function methodology. This highlights the increasing necessity and viability of computer-assisted proofs (especially in discrete geometric analysis), which now play a central role in verifying sharp threshold phenomena in high-dimensional combinatorics.

Implications and Outlook

On the theoretical side, this result closes a previously missing case in the hierarchy of isoperimetric inequalities on the discrete cube, mapping the landscape of exponents at and above the critical value β=1/2\beta=1/2. It underscores the power of Bellman-function-based approaches in discrete settings and sets a new standard for sharp constants in Poincaré and isoperimetric inequalities for Boolean functions. Practically, the precise identification of minimal boundary-expectation underpins analysis of Boolean threshold phenomena, influences functional inequalities in random graph theory, and informs quantitative estimates in distributed computation and complexity.

The connection to information theory, particularly noisy channel analysis, further cements the relevance of isoperimetry in combinatorics to fundamental limits in communication and cryptography. The endpoint analysis at β=12\beta=\frac{1}{2} is also suggestive for future exploration in the extremal theory of functional inequalities for non-Boolean or vector-valued maps and for the search for corresponding results in the quantum and Banach-space-valued settings.

On the computational side, the reliance on certified numerics demonstrates evolving methodologies at the interface of discrete mathematics, analysis, and validated computation—pointing to future research that relies on or improves such machine-assistance, potentially leading to automated conjecture checking and further sharp threshold discoveries.

Conclusion

This work rigorously establishes the endpoint sharp isoperimetric inequality at the critical exponent β=1/2\beta=1/2 for the Hamming cube, resolving conjectures in combinatorics and confirming predictions from information theory about Boolean function sensitivity. The analysis unifies advanced Bellman function constructions, detailed case analysis, and computer-assisted proof techniques. The resulting inequalities have direct implications for extremal combinatorics, Boolean analysis, and discrete probability, with promising avenues for further theoretical and computational investigation.

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Explain it Like I'm 14

Overview

This paper studies how sets and their “edges” behave in a simple but high‑dimensional world called the Hamming cube. The Hamming cube is just all nn‑bit strings (like 0001, 1010, …), with two strings connected by an edge if they differ in exactly one bit. The main result proves a sharp (best‑possible) inequality at a critical point, showing exactly how the average “boundary” of a set relates to the set’s size. This settles open problems and has consequences in combinatorics, analysis, and information theory.

Key Questions

The paper asks:

  • How small can the average boundary size of a set in the Hamming cube be, if you only know how big the set is?
  • Is there a “critical exponent” where the best possible inequality holds?
  • Can these inequalities help solve other problems, like how to split the cube into parts, or how noisy channels process simple (Boolean) functions?

In simple words: If you know how many points are in your set, how “edgy” must it be, on average?

Methods and Approach

The setting

  • The Hamming cube {0,1}n\{0,1\}^n is the set of all nn‑bit strings. Two strings are connected if they differ in one bit (like neighbors on a grid).
  • For a set AA inside the cube, and a point xx in AA, hA(x)h_A(x) is the number of single‑bit flips that take xx out of AA. Think of hA(x)h_A(x) as “how many doors at xx lead outside AA.” If xAx\notin A, then hA(x)=0h_A(x)=0.
  • The symbol E\mathbf{E} means the average over all points in the cube. So EhA\mathbf{E}\sqrt{h_A} is the average of hA(x)\sqrt{h_A(x)} across all xx.

The main strategy

  • The authors use a clever reduction (from work by Kahn and Park) that turns the big problem into checking a small “two‑point inequality.” Think of it like proving a law by checking it only on pairs of numbers xyx\le y, instead of the whole cube.
  • They build a special helper function BwB_w (a “Bellman function”) that is constructed piecewise from three simpler functions:
    • L(x)=xlog2(1/x)L(x)=x\sqrt{\log_2(1/x)} (captures the right shape when sets are small),
    • a smooth cubic Q(x)Q(x) (for the middle region),
    • and a curve Jw(x)J_w(x) coming from Gaussian geometry (for the larger side).
  • With BwB_w in hand, they prove the two‑point inequality across all cases (six regions). This uses:
    • Concavity/convexity (how curves bend),
    • Derivatives (how fast things change),
    • And computer‑assisted verification with interval arithmetic (a rigorous way to check inequalities using exact error bounds). They use the FLINT/Arb library to ensure the computations are mathematically trustworthy.

This combination—analytic estimates plus validated numerics—lets them cover tricky edge cases that are hard to handle by hand alone.

Main Findings

The sharp inequality at the critical exponent

The central theorem says: for any set A{0,1}nA\subset\{0,1\}^n with A12|A|\le \tfrac12,

EhA    Alog2 ⁣(1/A).\mathbf{E}\sqrt{h_A} \;\ge\; |A|\,\sqrt{\log_2\!\bigl(1/|A|\bigr)}.

  • Here A|A| is just the fraction of points of the cube that lie in AA (its size).
  • This is “sharp,” meaning:
    • It becomes an equality for very structured sets (subcubes: sets where some bits are fixed, like “all strings with bit 1 = 0 and bit 3 = 1”).
    • If you try to replace hA\sqrt{h_A} by hAβh_A^\beta with any β<12\beta<\tfrac12, no dimension‑free inequality like this can hold. So β=12\beta=\tfrac12 is truly the critical exponent.

Strengthening a classical result

  • A known isoperimetric inequality on the cube (Harper’s inequality) measures the average boundary in terms of A|A|.
  • Using the new bound, the authors give a sharper version (especially when AA is small), showing you get extra improvement from how the boundary is distributed. In short, you gain a factor that makes the inequality strictly stronger unless AA is extremely “boundary‑efficient” (like subcubes).

Implications and Impact

Settling a conjecture on cube partitions

  • The paper proves a conjecture by Kahn and Park about splitting the cube into three parts (A,B,W)(A,B,W) with A=12|A|=\tfrac12. It shows:

(A,B)+nW    12.|\nabla(A,B)| + \sqrt{n}\,|W| \;\ge\; \tfrac12.

Here (A,B)|\nabla(A,B)| measures how many edges go from AA to BB, and W|W| is the size of the leftover part.

  • In plain terms: If half the cube is AA, then either there are lots of edges between AA and BB, or the leftover piece WW must be big enough—there’s a minimum “interaction” you can’t avoid.

A sharp Poincaré inequality for Boolean functions

  • For functions f:{0,1}n{0,1}f:\{0,1\}^n\to\{0,1\} (Boolean), they prove a clean, sharp L1L^1 Poincaré inequality:

f1    fEf1.\|\nabla f\|_1 \;\ge\; \|f-\mathbf{E}f\|_1.

Roughly, it says “the total change of ff across edges is at least how much ff deviates from its average.”

  • This is better (for Boolean functions) than the best known bounds for general real‑valued functions and shows Boolean functions are “easier” to control in this setting.

Noisy channels and information theory

  • In studying how noise affects Boolean functions (each bit might flip with small probability), there’s a famous conjecture (Hellinger) predicting which functions are most informative.
  • In the “low‑noise limit,” the paper confirms a prediction: for balanced Boolean functions (half 0s, half 1s),

Esensitivity    1,\mathbf{E}\sqrt{\text{sensitivity}} \;\ge\; 1,

where “sensitivity” counts how many single‑bit flips change the function’s value at a point.

  • This ties geometric inequalities on the cube to how information flows through noisy systems, strengthening the bridge between combinatorics and information theory.

Takeaway

The authors nail down the exact behavior of the average boundary at the critical exponent β=12\beta=\tfrac12 on the Hamming cube. Their result is both best‑possible and powerful: it unlocks new insights, settles a standing conjecture, sharpens a fundamental inequality for Boolean functions, and supports predictions in information theory. The mix of deep math, careful case analysis, and rigorous computer verification makes the result robust and influential across multiple areas.

Knowledge Gaps

Knowledge gaps, limitations, and open questions

Below is a consolidated list of what remains unresolved or unexplored based on the paper.

  • Optimal Bellman function and parameter choice:
    • Determine the minimal parameter value w (the “critical” w⋆) for which the two-point inequality holds for the Bellman function Bw; the paper gives numerical evidence w⋆∈[0.897,0.898] but no proof.
    • Construct a single, non-piecewise (or simpler) Bellman function achieving sharpness across all regimes, or prove that the current piecewise L–Q–J construction is optimal.
  • Behavior for large sets (|A|→1−):
    • Identify the sharp asymptotics of E√hA as |A|→1−. The paper notes its bound is not optimal for |A|>1/2 and especially near |A|=1, where previous bounds are stronger; a complete sharp description on (1/2,1) remains open.
    • Unify the sharp lower bounds for E√hA on both sides of 1/2 into a single optimal statement valid for all |A|∈(0,1).
  • Stability and extremizer structure:
    • Prove quantitative stability: if E√hA is within ε of the sharp lower bound, must A be Oε-close (in measure or edge boundary) to a subcube? Precisely quantify the stability rate.
    • Fully characterize all equality/near-equality cases for Theorem 1.1 and for the strengthened classical isoperimetric inequality (1.3).
  • Dependence for β<1/2:
    • Although no dimension-free bound exists for β<1/2, determine the optimal n-dependent lower bounds for EhAβ as functions of n, |A|, and β<1/2, and identify the exact minimizers (e.g., Hamming balls) with matching constants.
  • Real-valued L1 Poincaré constant:
    • Determine the sharp constant in the L1 Poincaré inequality for real-valued functions on the cube (currently known to lie in (2/π, √(2/π)]). Investigate whether the Boolean improvement (constant 1) suggests structural insights for intermediate function classes (e.g., [0,1]-valued, few-level functions).
  • Sensitivity inequality beyond balanced functions and beyond low-noise:
    • Find the exact lower envelope of E√sf as a function of the bias α=Ef for all Boolean f (generalizing the balanced case α=1/2).
    • Go beyond the low-noise limit: quantify E√(1−(Tρf)2) for general ρ, identify extremizers (or sharp lower bounds) without assuming the Hellinger conjecture.
  • Generalization to biased product measures and other discrete structures:
    • Extend the sharp E√hA inequality to the p-biased discrete cube (μp), including identifying the correct critical exponent and sharp constants.
    • Extend to q-ary Hamming cubes and other product graphs; determine whether a similar “critical exponent” β=1/2 persists and what the sharp constants and extremizers are.
  • Partition inequalities beyond the half-cube:
    • Generalize the Kahn–Park partition bound |∇(A,B)| + √n|W| ≥ 1/2 (proved here for |A|=1/2) to |A|≠1/2; determine tight constants and characterize extremizers.
    • Develop k-way partition analogs and weighted versions (e.g., different penalties for W) with sharp constants.
  • Alternative refinements of the classical edge-isoperimetric inequality:
    • Identify other multiplicative or structural corrections (beyond |A|/|∂A|) that yield valid and possibly sharper, dimension-free improvements; determine their optimal constants and stability.
  • Methodological limitations and de-computerization:
    • Replace computer-assisted interval-arithmetic verifications with fully analytic proofs, or formalize them in a proof assistant for certified verification.
    • Identify analytic principles that systematically imply the verified two-point inequalities across all piecewise cases, potentially reducing casework.
  • Structural extensions and functional formulations:
    • Develop analogs of the E√hA inequality for general f:{0,1}n→0,1, relating E√(local boundary intensity) to Ef in a sharp, dimension-free manner.
    • Explore vector-valued and quantum variants (in light of the cited advances), seeking sharp constants and critical-exponent phenomena analogous to the Boolean case.
  • Gaussian linkage and “J”-profile:
    • Justify, sharpen, or simplify the use of the Gaussian isoperimetric profile J in the discrete two-point framework (e.g., achieve the case J with the optimal w analytically, or replace J with a discrete analog that retains the key curvature identity J·J''=−γ).

Practical Applications

Immediate Applications

The following applications can be leveraged now, based on the paper’s results, methods, and released tooling:

  • Communications and information theory (noisy binary channels)
    • Use case: Rapid screening of Boolean functions for robustness under low-noise binary channels using the confirmed bound for balanced functions, E[√s_f] ≥ 1, as a minimal sensitivity benchmark.
    • Tools/workflows: Integrate a diagnostic that estimates average sensitivity via random bit-flip sampling and checks the bound for candidate functions used in detection, coding, or decision rules.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Balanced Boolean functions (uniform input distribution and mean 1/2), low-noise regime (small bit-flip probability), uniform measure on {0,1}n.
  • Software/ML (binary classifiers, discrete models)
    • Use case: Robustness auditing of Boolean classifiers via the sharp L1 Poincaré inequality for Boolean-valued functions, ||∇f||₁ ≥ ||f − Ef||₁, to quantify a model’s “edge boundary” (discrete gradient) relative to its imbalance.
    • Tools/workflows: Implement a routine that estimates ||∇f||₁ from sampled bit flips; use as a regularizer or diagnostic to improve robustness to bit-level perturbations.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Model represented on the Hamming cube (binary features/decisions), uniform measure or an approximation thereof; the inequality is sharp for Boolean-valued functions.
  • Graph partitioning and parallel computing (hypercube topologies)
    • Use case: Constraint checking for balanced bisections of hypercube networks using the Kahn–Park corollary: |∇(A,B)| + √n * |W| ≥ 1/2 for |A| = 1/2, which quantifies the trade-off between cut size and “waste” in partitions.
    • Tools/workflows: Integrate the inequality into partitioning heuristics to certify minimum inter-partition edge requirements or bound leftover nodes in large-scale parallel systems with hypercube-like overlays.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Hypercube or hypercube-like topology; balanced partitions; exact applicability may diminish for non-hypercube graphs.
  • Formal verification and numerical analysis (certified inequalities)
    • Use case: Adopt the interval-arithmetic-based verification pipeline (FLINT/Arb, dyadic partitioning) to certify functional inequalities and bounds in safety-critical numerical algorithms.
    • Tools/workflows: Reuse the open-source codebase and methodology to verify two-point inequalities or Bellman-function-based bounds in other domains (optimization, control, discrete probability).
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Problems reducible to two-point inequalities; availability of interval arithmetic; expertise to model problem-specific Bellman functions.
  • Discrete mathematics and theoretical CS (influence and threshold phenomena)
    • Use case: Employ the sharp isoperimetric inequality at β = 1/2 to tighten bounds in analyses of influence, threshold behavior, and noise sensitivity in Boolean functions (supporting more precise proofs or algorithmic analyses).
    • Tools/workflows: Update theoretical analyses and lecture material; plug sharper bounds into existing frameworks (KKL-like bounds, influence-based arguments).
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Uniform cube measure; Boolean function framework; direct transfer depends on how existing results incorporate β = 1/2 bounds.
  • Data privacy (differential privacy for binary queries)
    • Use case: Baseline sensitivity assessment for balanced Boolean queries, translating into minimal required noise for DP mechanisms under uniform sampling assumptions.
    • Tools/workflows: Build a “DP budget calculator” that estimates global sensitivity via edge-boundary measures and the Poincaré/isoperimetric bounds.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Queries as balanced Boolean functions; uniform input; mapping between discrete sensitivity and DP noise scales.

Long-Term Applications

The following applications depend on further theoretical progress, scaling, or broader adoption:

  • Resolution of the Most Informative Boolean Function (Courtade–Kumar) via Hellinger-related advances
    • Use case: Designing more optimal communication and detection strategies for noisy binary channels if the Hellinger conjecture (linked to most informative functions) is fully resolved.
    • Tools/workflows: Algorithmic search for maximally informative Boolean functions and channel-optimized decision rules; formal integration into coding and detection pipelines.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Full conjecture resolution; bridging the low-noise limit results to finite-noise regimes and practical channel models.
  • Sharp constants for real-valued L1 Poincaré inequalities on the cube
    • Use case: Improved mixing-time, spectral-gap, and generalization guarantees for real-valued functions on discrete spaces (impacting MCMC, randomized algorithms, and high-dimensional statistics).
    • Tools/workflows: Tighter analytic bounds incorporated into algorithm tuning, convergence proofs, and variance reduction techniques.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Further mathematical advances to determine the sharp constant (currently known range (2/π, √(2/π))).
  • Automated Bellman-function synthesis and certification
    • Use case: General-purpose platform that automatically constructs and verifies Bellman functions to prove sharp inequalities across control theory, risk analysis, and functional analysis.
    • Tools/products: A library or service that encodes constraints, searches piecewise functions (e.g., L/Q/J-style hybrids), and certifies two-point inequalities via interval arithmetic at scale.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Robust interval libraries; scalable search strategies; domain-specific modeling to translate target inequalities into Bellman-function form.
  • Network design and distributed systems (hypercube-inspired overlays)
    • Use case: Use cube partition bounds to inform design of overlays/hashing schemes with predictable inter-node traffic and failover properties, especially in high-dimensional distributed storage or routing.
    • Tools/workflows: Partition planners that trade off cut size and leftovers; analytical guarantees integrated into system simulators.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Adoption of hypercube-like topologies; extension of inequalities to practical network constraints and non-uniform loads.
  • Quantum information and quantum ML
    • Use case: Extending sharp isoperimetric and Poincaré-type inequalities to quantum Boolean functions to improve learnability and robustness guarantees in quantum computing contexts.
    • Tools/workflows: Quantum analogs of Bellman functions and interval verification (potentially via validated numerics adapted to quantum states).
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Translation of discrete classical results to quantum settings; development of quantum interval methods and appropriate function classes.
  • Biological network modeling (Boolean gene regulatory networks)
    • Use case: Assess robustness and sensitivity of gene regulatory networks modeled as Boolean systems; leverage sensitivity/isoperimetric bounds to infer minimal perturbation effects.
    • Tools/workflows: Sensitivity analyzers for network models; robustness metrics calibrated by theoretical lower bounds.
    • Assumptions/dependencies: Validity of Boolean approximations; mapping biological noise to bit-flip models; empirical validation in specific datasets.

Glossary

  • Balanced Boolean functions: Boolean functions whose expectation is 1/2 (for {0,1}-valued) or 0 (for {±1}-valued), meaning they output each value equally often; "holds for balanced Boolean functions f:{0,1}n\to {0,1} (i.e. \mathbf{E}f=\tfrac12$)&quot;</li> <li><strong>Bellman function</strong>: A specially constructed function used to encode optimal inequalities and facilitate inductive proofs; &quot;This reduces the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:mainisoperim} to finding a Bellman function $B$ and verifying the two-point inequality.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Cauchy-Schwarz inequality</strong>: A fundamental inequality in inner-product spaces stating that the absolute value of an inner product is bounded by the product of norms; &quot;By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, \eqref{eqn:isoperimhalf} implies the following sharp strengthening of the classical isoperimetric inequality&quot;</li> <li><strong>Courtade–Kumar conjecture</strong>: A conjecture in information theory about which Boolean functions maximize mutual information over a noisy channel; &quot;also known as Courtade--Kumar conjecture \cite{KC13}.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Critical exponent</strong>: The threshold value of a parameter at which a qualitative change in behavior occurs; &quot;A sharp isoperimetric inequality for the Hamming cube is proved at the critical exponent $\beta=\frac12$.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Cubic interpolating polynomial</strong>: A degree-3 polynomial uniquely determined to match prescribed values at given points; &quot;Let $Q(x)betheuniquecubicinterpolatingpolynomialsuchthat be the unique cubic interpolating polynomial such that Q(0)=Q(1)=0,, Q(\frac12)=\frac12and and Q(\frac14)=2^{-3/2}$&quot;</li> <li><strong>Dyadic partitioning</strong>: A recursive technique that partitions intervals into halves to enable rigorous numerical verification; &quot;using recursive dyadic partitioning as explained in \cite[\S 4]{DIR24}.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Edge boundary measure</strong>: The normalized count of edges crossing between two sets in the cube; &quot;the edge boundary measure $|\nabla(A,B)|isdefinedby is defined by 2^{-n} \# \{(x,y)\in \mathcal{E}\,:\,x\in A, y\in B\}$&quot;</li> <li><strong>Gaussian isoperimetric profile</strong>: The function that describes optimal boundary measure versus volume in Gaussian space, characterized by I·I&#39;&#39; = −1; &quot;Let $I(x)denotetheGaussianisoperimetricprofile,i.e.theuniquefunctionon denote the Gaussian isoperimetric profile, i.e. the unique function on [0,1]suchthat such that I(0)=I(1)=0, I\cdot I''=-1$.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Hamming ball</strong>: The set of points in the Hamming cube within a fixed Hamming distance from a center; &quot;which can be seen by Hamming ball examples.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Hamming cube</strong>: The graph whose vertices are n-bit strings with edges between strings that differ in exactly one bit; &quot;A sharp isoperimetric inequality for the Hamming cube is proved at the critical exponent $\beta=\frac12$.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Harper’s classical isoperimetric inequality</strong>: A fundamental inequality on the Hamming cube bounding edge boundary size in terms of set size; &quot;For $\beta=1$ one has Harper&#39;s classical isoperimetric inequality \cite{Har66,Ber67,Hart76}.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Hellinger conjecture</strong>: A conjecture predicting optimality properties of Boolean functions under noisy channels using Hellinger distance; &quot;known as Hellinger conjecture \cite{ABCJN17, CGN25}.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Hölder’s inequality</strong>: A key inequality relating L<sup>p</sup> norms that generalizes the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality; &quot;Sharp lower bounds for $\mathbf{E} h_A^\betaforall for all \beta\ge \frac12$ follow from \eqref{eqn:isoperimhalf} and H\&quot;older&#39;s inequality&quot;</li> <li><strong>Interval arithmetic</strong>: Numerical method that tracks ranges of possible values to ensure rigor in computations; &quot;using interval arithmetic, more specifically using recursive dyadic partitioning as explained in \cite[\S 4]{DIR24}.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Interval enclosure</strong>: A guaranteed interval that contains the true value of a function over a range; &quot;Therefore, an interval enclosure for ${\mathrm{J}$ is given by&quot;</li> <li><strong>Isoperimetric inequality</strong>: An inequality relating the boundary size of a set to its volume, often with optimal constants; &quot;A sharp isoperimetric inequality for the Hamming cube is proved at the critical exponent $\beta=\frac12$.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Low-noise limit</strong>: The regime where the noise parameter tends to zero, simplifying asymptotic analysis; &quot;In the low-noise limit, the Hellinger conjecture would in particular imply that&quot;</li> <li><strong>Noise operator</strong>: The linear operator modeling independent bit-flips in the cube, parameterized by correlation; &quot;where $T_\rho f$ is the standard noise operator (see \cite{ODonnell}).&quot;</li> <li><strong>Noisy Boolean channels</strong>: Communication channels on {0,1}<sup>n</sup> where each bit is independently perturbed; &quot;noisy Boolean channels in information theory.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Poincaré inequality</strong>: An inequality bounding the deviation of a function from its mean by a gradient norm; &quot;Our next application is a sharp $L^1$ Poincar e inequality for Boolean-valued functions.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Sensitivity (of a Boolean function)</strong>: The number of input bit positions at which flipping the bit changes the function value; &quot;where $s_f(x)isthesensitivityof is the sensitivity of fat at x,whichisdefinedasthenumberofsinglebitflipsof, which is defined as the number of single-bit flips of xthatchangethevalueof that change the value of f(x)$&quot;</li> <li><strong>Subcube</strong>: A subset of the Hamming cube obtained by fixing some coordinates and letting others vary freely; &quot;first, it is an equality when $A$ is a subcube.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Two-point inequality</strong>: A functional inequality verified for pairs of points, central to the induction scheme; &quot;verifying the two-point inequality.&quot;</li> <li><strong>Vertex boundary</strong>: The set of vertices adjacent to the set but outside it (support of the boundary function); &quot;where $\partial Aisthesupportof is the support of h_A,i.e.thevertexboundaryof, i.e. the vertex boundary of A$."

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 5 tweets with 162 likes about this paper.