Testing Support Size More Efficiently Than Learning Histograms

Consider two problems about an unknown probability distribution $p$: 1. How many samples from $p$ are required to test if $p$ is supported on $n$ elements or not? Specifically, given samples from $p$, determine whether it is supported on at most $n$ elements, or it is "$ε$-far" (in total variation distance) from being supported on $n$ elements. 2. Given $m$ samples from $p$, what is the largest lower bound on its support size that we can produce? The best known upper bound for problem (1) uses a general algorithm for learning the histogram of the distribution $p$, which requires $Θ(\tfrac{n}{ε^2 \log n})$ samples. We show that testing can be done more efficiently than learning the histogram, using only $O(\tfrac{n}{ε\log n} \log(1/ε))$ samples, nearly matching the best known lower bound of $Ω(\tfrac{n}{ε\log n})$. This algorithm also provides a better solution to problem (2), producing larger lower bounds on support size than what follows from previous work. The proof relies on an analysis of Chebyshev polynomial approximations outside the range where they are designed to be good approximations, and the paper is intended as an accessible self-contained exposition of the Chebyshev polynomial method. 42 pages. This is the TheoretiCS journal version

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
TheoretiCS
Published
2026-05-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.46298/theoretics.26.10
Primary Topic
Online Learning and Analytics
Type
preprint
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Testing Support Size More Efficiently Than Learning Histograms

Renato Ferreira Pinto, Nathaniel Harms
TheoretiCS
Online Learning and Analytics
preprint

Testing Support Size More Efficiently Than Learning Histograms

Renato Ferreira Pinto, Nathaniel Harms
preprint en

Abstract

Consider two problems about an unknown probability distribution $p$: 1. How many samples from $p$ are required to test if $p$ is supported on $n$ elements or not? Specifically, given samples from $p$, determine whether it is supported on at most $n$ elements, or it is "$ε$-far" (in total variation distance) from being supported on $n$ elements. 2. Given $m$ samples from $p$, what is the largest lower bound on its support size that we can produce? The best known upper bound for problem (1) uses a general algorithm for learning the histogram of the distribution $p$, which requires $Θ(\tfrac{n}{ε^2 \log n})$ samples. We show that testing can be done more efficiently than learning the histogram, using only $O(\tfrac{n}{ε\log n} \log(1/ε))$ samples, nearly matching the best known lower bound of $Ω(\tfrac{n}{ε\log n})$. This algorithm also provides a better solution to problem (2), producing larger lower bounds on support size than what follows from previous work. The proof relies on an analysis of Chebyshev polynomial approximations outside the range where they are designed to be good approximations, and the paper is intended as an accessible self-contained exposition of the Chebyshev polynomial method. 42 pages. This is the TheoretiCS journal version

TheoretiCSVol. Volume 5
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing, University of California Berkeley, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Online Learning and Analytics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Testing Support Size More Efficiently Than Learning Histograms — Renato Ferreira Pinto, Nathaniel Harms · TheoretiCS (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS