Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a multi-view linear programming framework to derive bounds for locally recoverable codes with arbitrary fixed availability $a$. By analyzing Hamming distances across $(s+2)$-part partitions for retained orders $1 \le s \le a$, the framework captures compatibility and coupling constraints, leading to polynomial-size relaxations over finite fields. The work details the $s=2$ case and provides exact rational certificates for specific parameters, demonstrating that the four-block bound strictly outperforms simpler relaxations.
A novel multi-view LP framework tightens bounds for locally recoverable codes, revealing information loss in simpler models and achieving new exact constructions for availability $a=2$.
We develop a multi-view linear-programming framework for locally recoverable codes with arbitrary fixed availability $a$. For any retained order $1 \le s \le a$, the selected helper sets, the recovered coordinate, and their complement form an $(s+2)$-part partition. Recording the Hamming distance on all blocks preserves both compatibility among the selected repair alternatives and their coupling with the remaining coordinates. The resulting joint distribution satisfies centered counting identities, product-Krawtchouk positivity, and collision inequalities from the local-distance condition; for fixed $s$, these constraints give a polynomial-size relaxation for arbitrary, possibly nonlinear, codes over any finite field. Retaining one view recovers the three-block model of our companion paper. We develop the first genuinely multi-view case, $s=2$, in detail and specialize the exact computations to availability $a=2$. The resulting four-block LP projects to both the one-view three-block model and a globally conditioned two-view relaxation, making explicit the information lost by each coarsening. Exact rational primal-dual certificates together with checked constructions prove $M_{\max}(2,8,4,2,2,2)=8$, $M_{\max}(3,7,3,2,2,2)=27$, and $M_{\max}(4,7,3,2,2,2)=64$; in all three cases the four-block bound is strictly stronger than both coarsenings.