We initiate the study of *unate distributions* over $\{\pm1\}^n$ -- a natural analogue of unate Boolean functions -- by considering two basic testing problems that parallel well-studied questions for monotone distributions: - Uniformity Testing of Unate Distributions: We show that $\widetilde{\Theta}(n^{3/2})$ samples are sufficient and necessary, in contrast to the $\widetilde{\Theta}(n)$ sample complexity of the analogous problem for monotone distributions (Rubinfeld and Servedio, STOC 2005; Adamaszek, Czumaj, and Sohler, SODA 2010). - Unateness Testing of Arbitrary Distributions: We give a tester that uses $\widetilde{O}(n^{3/2})$ conditional samples in the subcube conditional model. On the other hand, every tester that draws conditional samples in a similar fashion, namely from $O(1)$-dimensional subcubes, must have an $\widetilde{\Omega}(n^{2/3})$ complexity. In the same model, the complexity of monotonicity testing was recently shown to be $\widetilde{\Theta}(n)$ (Chakrabarty et al., STOC 2025). Our algorithms for both problems significantly outperform the naive approach of reducing to the monotone case, which would incur $\Omega(n^2)$ sample complexity. Our uniformity tester relies on a subroutine that"weakly"learns the hidden orientations of a unate distribution, together with a new correlation bound for these estimates. Both tools may be of independent interest in studying monotonicity and unateness over $\{\pm1\}^n$.
Daeho Lee, Shivam Nadimpalli, Mingda Qiao et al.· 0 citations
LLM-as-judge evaluation reduces response quality assessment to a single holistic A/B preference choice, providing no mechanism to isolate which quality dimensions drove the preference or distinguish model errors from genuine label ambiguity. We propose SESSE (Sketch, Expand, Sort, Summarize, Evaluate), a training-free framework that decomposes holistic judgment into structured sub-questions mined directly from the judge's own error cases; requiring no oracle responses, task-specific rubrics, or fine-tuning. On RewardBench (n=1,000), SESSE achieves near-parity with the chain-of-thought baseline and is competitive with RISE-Judge-32B (92.7%), a fine-tuned specialist, while remaining fully training-free. Per-criterion vote evidence provides an interpretable audit trail for diagnosing label ambiguity and judge failure modes unavailable from a single holistic output token.
Daeho Lee, Mihai Delgeanu, Adel Youssef· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.