Maximum Cut
greedy cut -> \(\frac{1}{2}\)-approximation
maximization approximation ratio \(\alpha\) \(\(\frac{SOL_{G}}{OPT_{G}} \geq \alpha\)\)
minimization ... \(\leq\)
best approximation now 0.878~ (SDP semi-definite programming)
unique games conjecture -> hard to do better.
如何设计的?
Random Cut
Theorem for uniform random cut \(E(S, T)\) in graph \(G\).
Then
De-randomization by conditional expectation.
Travel from root to leaf while mark the vertex on decision tree.
De-randomization by pairwise independence
pairwise independent \(X_{v}\)
mutual independent (\(\log n\)) -> pairwise independent (\(n\))
use Parity construction
enumerate all assignments of \(\log n\) bit.
Parity search.
Fingerprinting
answer equality.
AB=C ?
\(O(n^{\omega})\)
find a truth
Freivald's Algorithm 1979
pick a uniform random \(r \in \{0, 1\}^{n}\)
check \(A(Br) = Cr\)?
proof ???
each time \(\frac{1}{2}\)
Polynomial Identity Testing (PIT)
\(f, g \in F[x]\) of degree \(d\)
if \(f = g\) ?
f and g are black-box.
You can do evaluation.
Deterministic algorithm (polynomial interpolation)
Fundamental theorem of algebra
Randomized algorithm
pick a uniform random r
check if \(f(r) = 0\)
communication complexity
consider # of bits communicated
Yao 1979
Every deterministic communication protocol solving EQ communicates \(n\) bits in the worst-case.
use a small field like [p] \(Z_{p}\)
pick a prime \(p \in [n^2, 2n^2]\)
probability \(O(\frac{1}{n})\)
what about \(f \in F[x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n}]\) of degree d.
poly-time deterministic for PIT -> either NEXP != P/poly or #P != FP
means that w.h.p. there is a poly-time deterministic for PIT.
There are some unknown powerful weapons.
Vandermonde determinant (like a black block)
Schwartz-Zippel Theorem
\(f \neq 0 \rightarrow \mathrm{Pr}[f(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n})=0] \leq \frac{d}{|S|}\)
# of any \(f \neq 0\) in any cube \(S^{n}\) \(\leq d |S|^{n-1}\)
application of Schwartz-Zippel
graph perfect matching
isomorphism of rooted tree
Reed-Muller codes
hardness vs randomness tradeoff
PCP
binary graph perfect matching
Hall's theorem (matching theorem!)
Hungarian method O(n^3)
Hopcroft-Karp algorithm \(O(m\sqrt{n})\)
Edmonds matrix
entries are variables (n*n not same as adjacent matrix)
perfect matching -> permutation
det(A) != 0 <=> exists a perfect matching
use Schwartz-Zippel to check \(det(A) = 0 ?\)
(Chistov's algorithm) to solve det(A) parallel!
Fingerprinting: hidden requisite: random function
another fingerprint (通信协议那里)
直接解读成为2进制表示,pick random prime \(p \in [k]\)
Karp-Rabin algorthm (pattern-matching)
Balls into Bins
birthday 单射
coupon collector 满射
occupancy 最大值
1-1 birthday
on-to coupon collector
pre-image size occupancy
Birthday Paradox
\(m > 57\) more than 99% two same birthday
use chain rule
Perfect Hashing
\(m = n^2\) Pr[no collision]
Simple Uniform Hash Assumption
H(|[n] - > [m]|) = nlogm
Break the assumption !
Universal Hashing (Universal hash family)
k-universal
Linear congruential model
Proposal Algorithm (Gale-Shapley algorithm)
Conwey Lattice theorem
Principle of Deferred Decisions
Poisson approximation
m balls into n bins \(\sim Bin(m, \frac{1}{n})\)
i.i.d. Poisson random variables \(Y_{1}, \cdots, Y_{n} \sim Pois(\frac{m}{n})\)
for \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{+}\)
Coupon collector:
(Poisson approximation brings independence here)
So
(sharp threshold like monotonous properties in random graph)
像是水龙头调参!
Occupancy problems:
wtf...
Theorem: \(\forall m_{1}, \cdots, m_{n} \in \mathbb{N}\) s.t. \(\sum_{i=1}^{n}m_{i} = m\)
When \(m = n \ln n + cn\)
i.i.d. \(Y_{1}, \cdots, Y_{n} \sim Pois(\frac{m}{n})\) and \(Y = \sum_{i=1}^{n} Y_{i}\)
Theorem: \(Y_{1}, \cdots, Y_{n} \sim Pois(\frac{m}{n})\), \(\forall\) nonnegative function \(f\)
Occupancy problem:
\(\mathbb{E}\) becomes \(\mathbb{Pr}\) when \(f\) is an indicator.
Load Balancing
application:
HashTable's query time complexity
Distributed computation (namely load balancing )
\(Y_{i,j}\) iff ball \(j\) lands in bin \(i\).
Conclusion
\(m = \Theta(n)\), \(O(\frac{\log n}{\log \log n})\) whp
\(m = \Omega(n\log n)\), \(O(\frac{m}{n})\) whp
whp \(1 - \frac{1}{n}\) or \(1 - \frac{1}{n^{c}}\) usually c does not have influence on time complexity.
why such definition? usually polynomial false examples
wlp
wvlp(exp) whlp
\(C_{m}^{t} \leq \frac{em}{t}^{t}\)
Concentration
Chernoff Bounds (Herman Chernoff) much stronger thant Markov's inequality (linear descent)
convenient chernoff bounds (when \(\mathbb{E} \in \Omega(\log n)\), somehow linear)
Moment generating function + extended Markov's inequality
1.Use Markov's inequality on moment generating function
2.use independence of \(X_{i}\), (NOT linearity of expectation)
3.\(1+y \leq e^{y}\)
4.optimize \(\lambda\)
(More) Chernoff Bounds
negatively associated r.v.
Hoeffding's inequality
Hoeffding's lemma
\(X \in [a, b]\), \(\mathbb{E}[X]=0\)
Hoeffding's inequality in Action:
Randomized Quicksort
\(\Theta (n\log n)\) whp
proof: consider every path then union bound
Power of two choices
place the ball in the less loaded bin.
Power of d choices \(O(\log^{d}(n))\)? X!
Hashing and Sketching
based on random mapping
Count distinct elements
input: \(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n} \in U = [n]\)
output: \(Z = |\{x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n}\}|\)
Data stream model: input date item comes one at a time.
Naive alg: \(\Omega(z\log N)\)
Sketch: (lossy) representation of data using space << Z
Is it possible? No
Lower bound: (Alon-Matias-Szegedy Godel prize): any deterministic(exact or approx) alg must use \(\Omega(N)\) bits of space in the worst case. (Intuition: communication complexity set disjoin)
must use both random and approx
Sketcher!: fu jian yi bo, yi quan chao ren
\((\epsilon, \delta)\)-estimator: \(\hat{Z}\)
PAC learning
insight: need both random and approx
Shakespeare: 30k words
(idealized)uniform hash function h: \(U \rightarrow [0,1]\)
\(\{h(x_{1}), \cdots, h(x_{n})\}\)
estimator:
First order approximation
\(\hat{Z} = \frac{1}{\min_{i} h(x_{i})} - 1\)
estimator variance is too large!
Markov's inequality
Corollary
\(f(x) \geq 0\)
Chebyshev's inequality
variance cannot be bounded.
找找是哪里贡献过去的
exchange of sum and variance needs only pair-wise independent.
超纲内容 Universal Hash family (Carter and Wegman 1979) Flajolet-Martin algorithm
k-universal
strong k-universal
Linear congruential hashing:
Degree-k polynomial in finite field with random coefficients
zeros(y) = max(i: 2^{i}|y) denote # of trailing 0's
一个函数能做到的最好的了
BJKST Algorithm
2-wise independent hash function \(h: [N] \rightarrow [M]\)
对理想化的 min sketch 的离散化.
定义一个随机变量, 写成 pair-wise 事件的和. (方便求期望和方差)
Frequency Moments
Data stream: \(x_{1}, x_{2}, \cdots, x_{n} \in U\)
for each \(x \in U\), define frequency of \(x\) as \(f_{x} = |\{i: x_{i} = x\}|\)
k-th frequency moments: \(F_{k} = \sum_{x \in U} f^{k}_{x}\)
Space complexity for \((\epsilon, \delta)\)-estimation: constant \(\epsilon, \delta\)
for \(k \leq 2\): polylog(N) AMS'96
for \(k > 2\): \(\theta(N^{1 - \frac{2}{k}})\) Indyk-Woodruff'05
Count distinct elements: \(F_{0}\)
optimal algorithm [Kane-Nelson-Woodruff'10] \(O(\epsilon^{-2}+\log N)\)
Frequency estimation
output estimator of \(f_{x}\) within additive error
multiplicative error 太难了
Heavy hitters: items that appears \(> \epsilon n\) times.
防止ddos
Data Structure for set
look CS168 Tool box!
bloom filter
数据库
bloom counter
count min sketch (CMS) 为什么这里只需要 2-universal 呢??? 感觉是因为扩大了内存
Concentration of Measure
概率论沉思录
Chernoff Bound
Bernstein Inequality
sum of independent trials
Sub-Gaussian Random variables
A centered(\(\mathbb{E}[Y] = 0\)) random variable Y is said to be sub-Gaussian with variance factor \(\nu\) if
Another interpretation of Chernoff-Hoeffding
The method of bounded differences
(McDiarmid's Inequality)
任何 lipschitz function 在 prod measure 都接近一个常函数
即使 alg 不随机, data 也可能随机.
Chernoff -> 1-Lipschitz
Hoeffding -> \((b_{i} - a_{i})\)-Lipschitz
心理史学(?)
consider # empty bins in Balls into Bins
is 1-Lipschitz.
Pattern Matching
k-Lipschitz
Sprinkling Points on Hypercube
iso pari metric
Harper's inequality (iso pari metric in Hamming Space)
telagrand inequality
McDiarmid's Inequality (worst-case)
For independent random variable \(X_{1}, X_{2}, \cdots, X_{n}\), if n-variate function \(f\) satisfies the Lipschitz condition: for every \(1 \leq i \leq n\),
for any possible \(i\) and \(y_{i}\).
Then for any \(t > 0\), \(\(\mathbb{Pr}[|f(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n}) - \mathbb{E}f(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{n})| \geq t ] \leq 2e^{-\frac{t^{2}}{2\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_{i}^{2}}}\)\)
This is a very powerful tool which can directly lead to Chernoff bound and Hoeffding bound.
Martingale
A sequence of random variables \(X_{0}, X_{1}, \cdots\) is a martingale if for all \(t>0\),
This expectancy is actually a function.
\(f(X_{0}, X_{1}, \cdots, X_{t-1})\)
e.g. Fair gambling game
Super-Martingale
Sub-Martingale
Martingale (Generalized Version) (filtration of a sequence of \(\sigma\)-algebra):
A sequence of random variables \(Y_{0}, Y_{1}, \cdots\) is a martingale
w.r.t. to \(X_{0}, X_{1}, \cdots\) if for all \(t \geq 0\),
\(Y_{t}\) is a function of \(X_{0}, \cdots, X_{t}\)
A fair gambling game:
\(X_{i}\): outcome (win/loss) of the \(i\)-th betting
\(Y_{i}\): capital after the \(i\)-th betting
Azuma's Inequality
For martingale \(Y_{0}, Y_{1}, \cdots\) (w.r.t. \(X_{0}, X_{1}, ...\)) satisfying:
for any \(n\geq 1\) and \(t > 0\):
Martingale rules: 如何必胜!
赌输了就加倍, 赢了立马跑路!
所以下注是有上限的...
(别想了别想了)
Doob Martingale
A Doob sequence \(Y_{0}, Y_{1}, \cdots, Y_{n}\) of an \(n\)-variate function \(f\) w.r.t. a random vector \((X_{1}, ..., X_{n})\) is:
Theorem:
The Doob sequence \(Y_{0}, Y_{1}, \cdots, Y_{n}\) is a martingale w.r.t. \(X_{1}, X_{2}, \cdots, X_{n}\).
Dimension reduction
Metric embedding
\(d(x, x) = 0\)
\(d(x, y) = d(y, x)\)
\(d(x, y) + d(y, z) >= d(x, y)\)
low-distortion: for small \(\alpha \geq 1\)
\(\forall x_{1}, x_{2} \in X\), \(\frac{1}{\alpha}d_{X}(x_{1}, x_{2}) \leq d_{Y}(\phi(x_{1}), \phi(x_{2})) \leq \alpha d_{X}(x_{1}, x_{2})\)
somehow approximation
spherical -> planar ? exists such \(\alpha\)?: NO
convert the problem from a hard metric space into a easy metric space. (find a low distortion mapping)
Euclidean embedding
Input: n points \(x_{1}, x_{2}, \cdots, x_{n} \in \mathbb{R}^{d}\)
Output: \(y_{1}, \cdots, y_{n} \in \mathbb{R}^{k}\)
usually k << d (the curse of dimensionality)
consider how small can k be
For what distance || . ||
The embedding should be efficiently constructible.
Johnson-Lindenstrauss Theorem 1984 (also check CS168Toolbox)
k = \(O(\frac{\log n}{\epsilon^{2}})\) optimal! (k is irrelevant to \(d\)!)
A linear transformation!
The probabilistic method: for random \(A \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d}\)
We just need to prove this probability is greater than 0 in order to prove this theorem.
What kind of "random"?
Efficient construction of random \(A \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d}\)
- projection onto uniform random k-dimensional subspace; (Johnson-Lindenstrauss, Dasgupta-Gupta)
- independent Gaussian entries; (Indyk-Motwani)
- i.i.d. -1/+1 entries (Achlioptas)
independent Gaussian entries
For some suitable k = \(O(\frac{\log n}{\epsilon^2})\)
Entries of \(A \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d}\) are choosen i.i.d. from \(\mathcal{N}(0, \frac{1}{k})\)
Here we use concentration of measurement
Chernoff bound for \(\chi^2\) distributions
How to generate \(k\) orthonormal unit vectors.
Uniformly and randomly generate unit vectors
Refusal sampling. Then Gram-Schmidt.
But how to generate unit vectors.
\(X = (X_{1}, X_2, \cdots, X_d)\) where \(X_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0, 1)\), then normalize.
unit => conditioned on
observation
=> random unit vector -> deterministic k-dimensional sub-space (like directly choose pre-k components)
Nearest Neighbor Search (NNS)
Metric space (X, dist):
Find the closest datapoint to input \(x\)
applications: pattern matching, database, bioinformatics
core: NNS
when dimension d is small: k-d tree, Voronoi diagram
One of stall and query must be the curse.
Hamming space \(\{0, 1\}^d\)
consider Hamming distance
when \(d \gg \log n\)
conjectured requires either super-poly(n) space or super-poly(d) time
cell-probe model Yao'81 (information theory)
decision tree interacts with a code
Currently SOTA(Yitong'08!) \(\(t = \Omega(\frac{d}{\log \frac{S}{nd}})\)\)
Blessing: randomization + approximation
Approximation Nearest Neighbor (ANN)
c-ANN (Approximation Nearest Neighbor) \(\(dist(x, y_i) \leq c \cdot \min_{1 \leq j \leq n} dist(x, y_j)\)\)
gap decision
(c, r)-ANN (Approximation Near Neighbor) return \(y_i\) that dist(\(x, y_i\))\(\leq c\cdot r\) if \(\exists y_j\) s.t. \(dist(x, y_j) \leq r\)
return "no" if \(\forall i, dist(x, y_i) > cr\)
either if otherwise (or further computation with arbitrary)
actually define r-ball and cr-ball
gap decision -> c-ANN
\(r_0 = D_{min}\)
\(r_k = \sqrt{c} \cdot r_{k-1}\)
\(r_{log_{c}(D_{max}/D_{min})} = D_{max}\)
\(\forall r, (\sqrt{c}, r)\)-ANN, return the first data \(y_k\)
PLEB (point location in eco box)
Why \(D_{min}\) and \(D_{max}\) are enough?
Hamming space (c, r)-ANN
Dimension reduction
(JLT ? open)
consider \(f: \{0, 1\}^{d} \rightarrow \{0,1\}^{k}\), \(k = O(\log n)\)
conserving the r-ball
then make an offline table ... (\(O(n)\))
\(A\in GF(2)^{k\times d}\) i.i.d. Bernoulli(p)
store all s-balls \(B_s(u) = \{y_i | dist(u, z_i) \leq s\}\) for all \(u \in \{0, 1\}^{k}\)
\(\forall x, y \in \{0, 1\}^d:\)
Then union bound \(\Rightarrow\) w.h.p.
two steps samplings
LSH (locality sensitive hashing) [Indyk-Motwani 1998]
A random \(h: X \rightarrow U\) is an \((r, cr, p, q)\)-LSH if \(\forall x, y \in X\):
Proposision
\(\exists\) an \((r, cr, p, q)\)-LSH \(h: X \rightarrow U\) $\Rightarrow $ \(\exists\) an \((r, cr, p^k, q^k)\)-LSH \(h: X \rightarrow U^k\)
Suppose there is \((c, cr, p^*, \frac{1}{n})\)-LSH.
Let \(q^k < \frac{1}{n}\)
independent trials \(\frac{1}{p^*}\)
use FKS hash
\(\rho = \frac{\log p}{\log q}\)
for Hamming space, randomly pick a bit \(i \in [d]\)
\(\rho = \frac{1}{c}\)
But optimal for Hamming space ...
Fourier transform log convex (left for homework)
Lovasz Local Lemma
k-SAT
SAT-solver
k-CNF(conjunctive normal form) exactly k variables
Determine a k-CNF whether is satisfiable
FAITH!
Clauses are disjoint: always satisfiable
\(m < 2^k\) is always satisfiable.
The probabilistic method
Draw uniform random
Bad event \(A^i\) Clause \(C_i\) is violated
\(\mathbb{P}[A_i] = 2^{-k}\)
then union bound ...
\(\mathbb{P}[\lor] \leq m2^{-k}\)
The probabilistic method fourth edition (Noga Alon, Joel H. Spencer, Erdos)
why not more powerful bound
Limited Dependency
Dependency degree \(d\)
each clause intersects $\leq $ \(d\) other clauses
"local" union bound ? \(d2^{-k} < 1\) ? NO
(LLL) \(e(d+1)2^{-k} \leq 1\)
or
\(4d2^{-k} \leq 1\)
LLL:
"Bad" events \(A_1, \cdot, A_m\), where all \(\mathbb{P}[A_j] \leq p\)
Dependency degree d:
each \(A_{i}\) is "depenedent" of \(\leq d\) other events
(each \(A_i\) is mutually independent of all except \(\leq d\) other events)
Dependency graph
Vertices are bad events \(A_1, \cdots, A_m\).
Each \(A_i\) is mutually independent of non-adjacent events.
这东西是唯一定义的吗?
Now consider CSP
independent random variables: \(X_1, X_2, X_3, X_4\)
bad events (defined on subsets of variables)
Variable framework
also there is the abstract framework.
\(\Gamma(c)\) neighborhood
\(A_1, \cdot, A_m\) has a dependency graph given by \(\Gamma(\cdot)\)
\(A_i\) is mutually independent of all \(A_i \notin \Gamma(A_i)\)
LLL
\(p = \max_{i} \mathbb{P}[A_i]\) and \(d = \max_{i}|\Gamma(A_i)|\)
留作业了
then
CSP
Variables: \(x_1, \cdots, x_n \in [q]\)
Constrains: \(C_1, \cdots, C_m\)
each \(C_i\) is defined on a subset \(vbl(C_i)\) of variables
\(C_i: [q]^{vbl(C_i)} \rightarrow \text{True, False}\)
Any \(x \in [q]^n\) is a CSP solution if it satisfied all \(C_1, \cdots, C_m\)
Examples: abab
Hypergraph coloring:
proper \(q\)-coloring of H:
\(f: V \rightarrow [q]\) such that no hyperedge is monochromatic
Theorem: for any k-uniform hypergraph H of max-degree \(\Delta\),
\(k \geq \log_{q}\Delta + \log_q\log_q\Delta + O(1)\)
Uniformly and independently color each \(v \in V\) a random color \(\in [p]\)
Bad event \(A_e\) for each hyperedge \(e\in E \subset C_v^k\): e is monochromatic
\(\mathbb{P}[A_e] \leq p = q^{1-k}\)
Dependency degree for bad events \(d \leq k(\Delta - 1)\)
Apply LLL
LLL(asymmetric case):
\(\exists a_1, \cdots, a_m \in [0, 1)\):
LLL(symmetric case) proof!
For asymmetric case:
conditioned probability. Induction
I.H.: \(\mathbb{P}[A_i | \bar{A_{j_{1}}} \cdots \bar{A_{j_{k}}}] \leq a_i\) holds for all smaller \(k\)
It never makes sense! Move the formulas around.
We want to find the exact solution.
What's next:
tight(er) LLL condition: Shearer's bound
tighter bounds when more (than just local dependency structure) are known: the probabilistic method beyond LLL.
Algorithmic LLL(The Moser-Tardos Algorithm)
"Bad" events \(A_1, \cdots, A_m\) in a probability space
Give an efficient alg:
find such a good sample \(\sigma \in \Omega\) avoiding \(\lor A_i\)
Pick the Variable framework for LLL (CSP with independent variables)
Moser-Tardos Algorithm:
draw independent samples of \(X_1, \cdots, X_n\);
while \(\exists\) a bad event \(A_i\) that occurs:
resample all \(X_j \in vbl(A_i)\);
Assume the oracles for draw random variables and check if \(A_i\) occurs.
Needs two oracles: 1. draw ind. samples of \(X_j\), check if \(A_i\) occurs
很容易构造出 \(A_i\) 是啥 NP-hard 什么的。
\(X_j\) 也不容易 sample 出来
Thm [Morse-Tardo'10]
terminates within \(\sum_{i=1}^{m}(1 - \frac{1}{1-\alpha_i}) = \frac{m}{d}\) samples a.k.a. linear time.
Random 随便的感觉 不一定有机会性 莫名其妙的 (???)
来自于一种无规律性(?)
not artificial!
Stochastic 才是真的有随机性
Execution Log (bold proof)
\(B\) of the M-T algorithm
\(B_1, B_2, \cdots, \in = \{A_1, \cdots, A_m\}\)
random sequence of resampled bad events.
to prove
use the random bits technique "resampling table"
Witness tree \(T(B, t)\): each node \(u\) with label \(A_{[u]}\), siblings have distinct labels
Witness tree is actually a DAG with partial order \(\leq\) maintaing levels.
Initially, \(T\) constains a single root \(r\) with \(B_t\)
for \(i = t - 1\) to 1 : if \(B_i \in \Gamma^+(A_{[u]})\) for some node \(u \in T\)
add child \(v \rightarrow\) deepest such \(u\), labeled with \(B_i\)
\(T(B, t)\) is the resulting \(T\)
Witness tree is the finite truncation of Universal covering.
Proposition: \(\forall s \neq t\), \(T(B, s) \neq T(B, t)\)
enumerate all the rooted trees ...
就想办法把\(\mathbb{E}\)放进来。比较常见的做法。
Lemma 1(coupling 耦合法): For any particular witness tree \(\tau\):
(其实是等于的)
proof:
consider the simulating on resampling table.
Example
Random graph
\(G(n, p_1)\), \(G(n, p_2)\) \(p_1 \leq p_2\)
To prove,
\(\mathbb{P}[p_1 \text{ connected}] \leq \mathbb{P}[p_2 \text{ connected}]\)
Following the coupling rule, fliping two coins.
Algorithm analysis ends after the coupling lemma...
Random tree (Galton-Watson process)
Grow a random witness tree \(T_A\) with root-label \(A\).
initially, $T_A$ is a single root with label $A$
for i=1,2,...:
for every vertex u at depth i (root has depth 1) in T_A
for every A_j \in \Gamma^{+}(A_[u]):
add a new child v to u ind. with prob. a_j and label it with A_j;
stop if no new child added for an entire level
Lemma 2. For any particular witness tree \(\tau \in \mathcal{T}_{A_{i}}\):
proof:
double counting ...
Moser's algorithm and Entropic proof
Moser's fix-it algorithm
Fix(\(C_i\)):
resample all variables in \(vbl(C_i)\);
while \(\exists\) violated \(C_j \in \Gamma^{+}(C_i)\):
Fix(\(C_j\));
Theorem:
\(d<2^{k-3}\) \(\Rightarrow\) total # of calls to Fix() is \(O(m\log m + \log n)\)
Incompressibility Principle
"Lossless compression of random data is impossible"
For any injective function Enc: \(\{0, 1\}^{N} \rightarrow^{1 to 1} \{0, 1\}^{*}\), for uniform random \(s \in \{0, 1\}^{N}\), for any integer \(l>0\),
听懵逼了