Perfect $L_p$ Sampling in a Data Stream
August 16, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Rajesh Jayaram, David P. Woodruff
arXiv ID
1808.05497
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
45
Venue
IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
In this paper, we resolve the one-pass space complexity of $L_p$ sampling for $p \in (0,2)$. Given a stream of updates (insertions and deletions) to the coordinates of an underlying vector $f \in \mathbb{R}^n$, a perfect $L_p$ sampler must output an index $i$ with probability $|f_i|^p/\|f\|_p^p$, and is allowed to fail with some probability $Ξ΄$. So far, for $p > 0$ no algorithm has been shown to solve the problem exactly using $\text{poly}( \log n)$-bits of space. In 2010, Monemizadeh and Woodruff introduced an approximate $L_p$ sampler, which outputs $i$ with probability $(1 \pm Ξ½)|f_i|^p /\|f\|_p^p$, using space polynomial in $Ξ½^{-1}$ and $\log(n)$. The space complexity was later reduced by Jowhari, SaΔlam, and Tardos to roughly $O(Ξ½^{-p} \log^2 n \log Ξ΄^{-1})$ for $p \in (0,2)$, which tightly matches the $Ξ©(\log^2 n \log Ξ΄^{-1})$ lower bound in terms of $n$ and $Ξ΄$, but is loose in terms of $Ξ½$. Given these nearly tight bounds, it is perhaps surprising that no lower bound exists in terms of $Ξ½$---not even a bound of $Ξ©(Ξ½^{-1})$ is known. In this paper, we explain this phenomenon by demonstrating the existence of an $O(\log^2 n \log Ξ΄^{-1})$-bit perfect $L_p$ sampler for $p \in (0,2)$. This shows that $Ξ½$ need not factor into the space of an $L_p$ sampler, which closes the complexity of the problem for this range of $p$. For $p=2$, our bound is $O(\log^3 n \log Ξ΄^{-1})$-bits, which matches the prior best known upper bound in terms of $n,Ξ΄$, but has no dependence on $Ξ½$. For $p<2$, our bound holds in the random oracle model, matching the lower bounds in that model. Moreover, we show that our algorithm can be derandomized with only a $O((\log \log n)^2)$ blow-up in the space (and no blow-up for $p=2$). Our derandomization technique is general, and can be used to derandomize a large class of linear sketches.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Relief-Based Feature Selection: Introduction and Review
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted