One popular method for dealing with large-scale data sets is sampling. For example, by using the empirical statistical leverage scores as an importance sampling distribution, the method of algorithmic leveraging samples and rescales rows columns of data matrices to reduce the data size before performing computations on the subproblem. This method has been successful in improving computational efficiency of algorithms for matrix problems such as least-squares approximation, least absolute deviations approximation, and low-rank matrix approximation. Existing work has focused on algorithmic issues such as worst-case running times and numerical issues associated with providing high-quality implementations, but none of it addresses statistical aspects of this method. In this paper, we provide a simple yet effective framework to evaluate the statistical properties of algorithmic leveraging in the context of estimating parameters in a linear regression model with a fixed number of predictors. We show that from the statistical perspective of bias and variance, neither leverage-based sampling nor uniform sampling dominates the other. This result is particularly striking, given the well-known result that, from the algorithmic perspective of worst-case analysis, leverage-based sampling provides uniformly superior worst-case algorithmic results, when compared with uniform sampling. Based on these theoretical results, we propose and analyze two new leveraging algorithms. A detailed empirical evaluation of existing leverage-based methods as well as these two new methods is carried out on both synthetic and real data sets. The empirical results indicate that our theory is a good predictor of practical performance of existing and new leverage-based algorithms and that the new algorithms achieve improved performance.
Our leverage-based methods for estimating @math are related to resampling methods such as the bootstrap @cite_3 , and many of these resampling methods enjoy desirable asymptotic properties @cite_6 . Resampling methods in linear models were studied extensively in @cite_29 and are related to the jackknife @cite_35 @cite_4 @cite_20 @cite_41 . They usually produce resamples at a similar size to that of the full data, whereas algorithmic leveraging is primarily interested in constructing subproblems that are much smaller than the full data. In addition, the goal of resampling is traditionally to perform statistical inference and not to improve the running time of an algorithm, except in the very recent work @cite_24 . Additional related work in statistics includes @cite_0 @cite_30 @cite_23 @cite_36 @cite_2 .
@cite_30 @cite_35 @cite_4 @cite_41 @cite_36 @cite_29 @cite_6 @cite_3 @cite_24 @cite_0 @cite_23 @cite_2 @cite_20
2615055317 2075241889 2547508527 2000931246
One popular method for dealing with large-scale data sets is sampling. For example, by using the empirical statistical leverage scores as an importance sampling distribution, the method of algorithmic leveraging samples and rescales rows columns of data matrices to reduce the data size before performing computations on the subproblem. This method has been successful in improving computational efficiency of algorithms for matrix problems such as least-squares approximation, least absolute deviations approximation, and low-rank matrix approximation. Existing work has focused on algorithmic issues such as worst-case running times and numerical issues associated with providing high-quality implementations, but none of it addresses statistical aspects of this method. In this paper, we provide a simple yet effective framework to evaluate the statistical properties of algorithmic leveraging in the context of estimating parameters in a linear regression model with a fixed number of predictors. In particular, for several versions of leverage-based sampling, we derive results for the bias and variance, both conditional and unconditional on the observed data. We show that from the statistical perspective of bias and variance, neither leverage-based sampling nor uniform sampling dominates the other. This result is particularly striking, given the well-known result that, from the algorithmic perspective of worst-case analysis, leverage-based sampling provides uniformly superior worst-case algorithmic results, when compared with uniform sampling. Based on these theoretical results, we propose and analyze two new leveraging algorithms: one constructs a smaller least-squares problem with "shrinkage" leverage scores (SLEV), and the other solves a smaller and unweighted (or biased) least-squares problem (LEVUNW). A detailed empirical evaluation of existing leverage-based methods as well as these two new methods is carried out on both synthetic and real data sets. The empirical results indicate that our theory is a good predictor of practical performance of existing and new leverage-based algorithms and that the new algorithms achieve improved performance. For example, with the same computation reduction as in the original algorithmic leveraging approach, our proposed SLEV typically leads to improved biases and variances both unconditionally and conditionally (on the observed data), and our proposed LEVUNW typically yields improved unconditional biases and variances. The resampling algorithm of Moser & Tardos is a powerful approach to develop constructive versions of the Lovasz Local Lemma (LLL). We generalize this to partial resampling: when a bad event holds, we resample an appropriately-random subset of the variables that define this event, rather than the entire set as in Moser & Tardos. This is particularly useful when the bad events are determined by sums of random variables. This leads to several improved algorithmic applications in scheduling, graph transversals, packet routing etc. For instance, we improve the approximation ratio of a generalized @math -dimensional scheduling problem studied by Azar & Epstein from @math to @math , and settle a conjecture of Szabo & Tardos on graph transversals asymptotically. As a point of comparison with the MT algorithm, we show a family of constraint satisfaction problems that does not have "locality" (every constraint is affected by every variable), and so the LLL and the Moser-Tardos algorithm do not give any useful results; however, our method gives strong scale-free approximation ratios and terminates in expected polynomial time for this family. We present an algorithm for the statistical learning setting with a bounded exp-concave loss in @math dimensions that obtains excess risk @math with probability at least @math . The core technique is to boost the confidence of recent in-expectation @math excess risk bounds for empirical risk minimization (ERM), without sacrificing the rate, by leveraging a Bernstein condition which holds due to exp-concavity. We also show that with probability @math the standard ERM method obtains excess risk @math . We further show that a regret bound for any online learner in this setting translates to a high probability excess risk bound for the corresponding online-to-batch conversion of the online learner. Lastly, we present two high probability bounds for the exp-concave model selection aggregation problem that are quantile-adaptive in a certain sense. The first bound is a purely exponential weights type algorithm, obtains a nearly optimal rate, and has no explicit dependence on the Lipschitz continuity of the loss. The second bound requires Lipschitz continuity but obtains the optimal rate. Let f be a random Boolean formula that is an instance of 3-SAT. We consider the problem of computing the least real number k such that if the ratio of the number of clauses over the number of variables of f strictly exceeds k , then f is almost certainly unsatisfiable. By a well-known and more or less straightforward argument, it can be shown that kF5.191. This upper bound was improved by to 4.758 by first providing new improved bounds for the occupancy problem. There is strong experimental evidence that the value of k is around 4.2. In this work, we define, in terms of the random formula f, a decreasing sequence of random variables such that, if the expected value of any one of them converges to zero, then f is almost certainly unsatisfiable. By letting the expected value of the first term of the sequence converge to zero, we obtain, by simple and elementary computations, an upper bound for k equal to 4.667. From the expected value of the second term of the sequence, we get the value 4.601q . In general, by letting the U This work was performed while the first author was visiting the School of Computer Science, Carleton Ž University, and was partially supported by NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council . of Canada , and by a grant from the University of Patras for sabbatical leaves. The second and third Ž authors were supported in part by grants from NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research . Council of Canada . During the last stages of this research, the first and last authors were also partially Ž . supported by EU ESPRIT Long-Term Research Project ALCOM-IT Project No. 20244 . †An extended abstract of this paper was published in the Proceedings of the Fourth Annual European Ž Symposium on Algorithms, ESA’96, September 25]27, 1996, Barcelona, Spain Springer-Verlag, LNCS, . pp. 27]38 . That extended abstract was coauthored by the first three authors of the present paper. Correspondence to: L. M. Kirousis Q 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 1042-9832r98r030253-17 253