Stable algorithms cannot reliably find isolated perceptron solutions
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866910091530207232 |
|---|---|
| author | Gong, Shuyang Huang, Brice Li, Shuangping Sellke, Mark |
| author_facet | Gong, Shuyang Huang, Brice Li, Shuangping Sellke, Mark |
| contents | We study the binary perceptron, a random constraint satisfaction problem that asks to find a Boolean vector in the intersection of independently chosen random halfspaces. A striking feature of this model is that at every positive constraint density, it is expected that a $1-o_N(1)$ fraction of solutions are \emph{strongly isolated}, i.e. separated from all others by Hamming distance $Ω(N)$. At the same time, efficient algorithms are known to find solutions at certain positive constraint densities. This raises a natural question: can any isolated solution be algorithmically visible?
We answer this in the negative: no algorithm whose output is stable under a tiny Gaussian resampling of the disorder can \emph{reliably} locate isolated solutions. We show that any stable algorithm has success probability at most $\frac{3\sqrt{17}-9}{4}+o_N(1)\leq 0.84233$. Furthermore, every stable algorithm that finds a solution with probability $1-o_N(1)$ finds an isolated solution with probability $o_N(1)$. The class of stable algorithms we consider includes degree-$D$ polynomials up to $D\leq o(N/\log N)$; under the low-degree heuristic \cite{hopkins2018statistical}, this suggests that locating strongly isolated solutions requires running time $\exp(\widetildeΘ(N))$.
Our proof does not use the overlap gap property. Instead, we show via Pitt's correlation inequality that after a random perturbation of the disorder, the number of solutions located close to a pre-existing isolated solution cannot concentrate at $1$. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_00328 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Stable algorithms cannot reliably find isolated perceptron solutions Gong, Shuyang Huang, Brice Li, Shuangping Sellke, Mark Computational Complexity Data Structures and Algorithms Mathematical Physics Probability We study the binary perceptron, a random constraint satisfaction problem that asks to find a Boolean vector in the intersection of independently chosen random halfspaces. A striking feature of this model is that at every positive constraint density, it is expected that a $1-o_N(1)$ fraction of solutions are \emph{strongly isolated}, i.e. separated from all others by Hamming distance $Ω(N)$. At the same time, efficient algorithms are known to find solutions at certain positive constraint densities. This raises a natural question: can any isolated solution be algorithmically visible? We answer this in the negative: no algorithm whose output is stable under a tiny Gaussian resampling of the disorder can \emph{reliably} locate isolated solutions. We show that any stable algorithm has success probability at most $\frac{3\sqrt{17}-9}{4}+o_N(1)\leq 0.84233$. Furthermore, every stable algorithm that finds a solution with probability $1-o_N(1)$ finds an isolated solution with probability $o_N(1)$. The class of stable algorithms we consider includes degree-$D$ polynomials up to $D\leq o(N/\log N)$; under the low-degree heuristic \cite{hopkins2018statistical}, this suggests that locating strongly isolated solutions requires running time $\exp(\widetildeΘ(N))$. Our proof does not use the overlap gap property. Instead, we show via Pitt's correlation inequality that after a random perturbation of the disorder, the number of solutions located close to a pre-existing isolated solution cannot concentrate at $1$. |
| title | Stable algorithms cannot reliably find isolated perceptron solutions |
| topic | Computational Complexity Data Structures and Algorithms Mathematical Physics Probability |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00328 |