Author
Abstract
Consider a set of items, X, with a total of n items, among which a subset, denoted as $$I\subseteq X$$ I ⊆ X , consists of defective items. In the context of group testing, a test is conducted on a subset of items Q, where $$Q \subset X$$ Q ⊂ X . The result of this test is positive, yielding 1, if Q includes at least one defective item, that is if $$Q \cap I \ne \emptyset $$ Q ∩ I ≠ ∅ . It is negative, yielding 0, if no defective items are present in Q. We introduce a novel method for deriving lower bounds in the context of non-adaptive randomized group testing. For any given constant j, any non-adaptive randomized algorithm that, with probability at least 2/3, estimates the number of defective items |I| within a constant factor requires at least $$\Omega \left( \dfrac{\log n}{\log \log {\mathop {\cdots }\limits ^{j}}\log n}\right) $$ Ω log n log log ⋯ j log n tests. Our result almost matches the upper bound of $$O(\log n)$$ O ( log n ) and addresses the open problem posed by Damaschke and Sheikh Muhammad in (Combinatorial Optimization and Applications - 4th International Conference, COCOA 2010, pp 117–130, 2010; Discrete Math Alg Appl 2(3):291–312, 2010). Furthermore, it enhances the previously established lower bound of $$\Omega (\log n/\log \log n)$$ Ω ( log n / log log n ) by Ron and Tsur (ACM Trans Comput Theory 8(4): 15:1–15:19, 2016), and independently by Bshouty (30th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation, ISAAC 2019, LIPIcs, vol 149, pp 2:1–2:9, 2019). For estimation within a non-constant factor $$\alpha (n)$$ α ( n ) , we show: If a constant j exists such that $$\alpha >{\log \log {\mathop {\cdots }\limits ^{j}}\log n}$$ α > log log ⋯ j log n , then any non-adaptive randomized algorithm that, with probability at least 2/3, estimates the number of defective items |I| to within a factor $$\alpha $$ α requires at least $$\Omega \left( \dfrac{\log n}{\log \alpha }\right) .$$ Ω log n log α . In this case, the lower bound is tight.
Suggested Citation
Nader H. Bshouty, 2025.
"Improved lower bound for estimating the number of defective items,"
Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 1-19, March.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:jcomop:v:49:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10878-025-01264-9
DOI: 10.1007/s10878-025-01264-9
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jcomop:v:49:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10878-025-01264-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.