Tight Query Complexity Lower Bounds for PCA via Finite Sample Deformed Wigner Law

April 04, 2018 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› Symposium on the Theory of Computing

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Max Simchowitz, Ahmed El Alaoui, Benjamin Recht arXiv ID 1804.01221 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.DS, cs.IT, math.OC, stat.ML Citations 44 Venue Symposium on the Theory of Computing Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
We prove a \emph{query complexity} lower bound for approximating the top $r$ dimensional eigenspace of a matrix. We consider an oracle model where, given a symmetric matrix $\mathbf{M} \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$, an algorithm $\mathsf{Alg}$ is allowed to make $\mathsf{T}$ exact queries of the form $\mathsf{w}^{(i)} = \mathbf{M} \mathsf{v}^{(i)}$ for $i$ in $\{1,...,\mathsf{T}\}$, where $\mathsf{v}^{(i)}$ is drawn from a distribution which depends arbitrarily on the past queries and measurements $\{\mathsf{v}^{(j)},\mathsf{w}^{(i)}\}_{1 \le j \le i-1}$. We show that for every $\mathtt{gap} \in (0,1/2]$, there exists a distribution over matrices $\mathbf{M}$ for which 1) $\mathrm{gap}_r(\mathbf{M}) = ฮฉ(\mathtt{gap})$ (where $\mathrm{gap}_r(\mathbf{M})$ is the normalized gap between the $r$ and $r+1$-st largest-magnitude eigenvector of $\mathbf{M}$), and 2) any algorithm $\mathsf{Alg}$ which takes fewer than $\mathrm{const} \times \frac{r \log d}{\sqrt{\mathtt{gap}}}$ queries fails (with overwhelming probability) to identity a matrix $\widehat{\mathsf{V}} \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times r}$ with orthonormal columns for which $\langle \widehat{\mathsf{V}}, \mathbf{M} \widehat{\mathsf{V}}\rangle \ge (1 - \mathrm{const} \times \mathtt{gap})\sum_{i=1}^r ฮป_i(\mathbf{M})$. Our bound requires only that $d$ is a small polynomial in $1/\mathtt{gap}$ and $r$, and matches the upper bounds of Musco and Musco '15. Moreover, it establishes a strict separation between convex optimization and \emph{randomized}, "strict-saddle" non-convex optimization of which PCA is a canonical example: in the former, first-order methods can have dimension-free iteration complexity, whereas in PCA, the iteration complexity of gradient-based methods must necessarily grow with the dimension.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted