low rank approximation
Sublinear Time Low-Rank Approximation of Distance Matrices
Such distance matrices are commonly computed in software packages and have applications to learning image manifolds, handwriting recognition, and multi-dimensional unfolding, among other things. In an attempt to reduce their description size, we study low rank approximation of such matrices. Our main result is to show that for any underlying distance metric $d$, it is possible to achieve an additive error low rank approximation in sublinear time. We note that it is provably impossible to achieve such a guarantee in sublinear time for arbitrary matrices $\AA$, and our proof exploits special properties of distance matrices. We develop a recursive algorithm based on additive projection-cost preserving sampling.
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- Europe > Italy > Lazio > Rome (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- (12 more...)
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.14)
- North America > United States > Virginia > Arlington County > Arlington (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- (4 more...)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.14)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia County > Philadelphia (0.04)
- (5 more...)
- Asia > Middle East > Israel (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Israel (0.04)
- North America > United States > Utah (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
Hardness of Low Rank Approximation of Entrywise Transformed Matrix Products
Inspired by fast algorithms in natural language processing, we study low rank approximation in the entrywise transformed setting where we want to find a good rank $k$ approximation to $f(U \cdot V)$, where $U, V^\top \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times r}$ are given, $r = O(\log(n))$, and $f(x)$ is a general scalar function. Previous work in sublinear low rank approximation has shown that if both (1) $U = V^\top$ and (2) $f(x)$ is a PSD kernel function, then there is an $O(nk^{\omega-1})$ time constant relative error approximation algorithm, where $\omega \approx 2.376$ is the exponent of matrix multiplication. We give the first conditional time hardness results for this problem, demonstrating that both conditions (1) and (2) are in fact necessary for getting better than $n^{2-o(1)}$ time for a relative error low rank approximation for a wide class of functions. We give novel reductions from the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) that rely on lower bounding the leverage scores of flat sparse vectors and hold even when the rank of the transformed matrix $f(UV)$ and the target rank are $n^{o(1)}$, and when $U = V^\top$. Furthermore, even when $f(x) = x^p$ is a simple polynomial, we give runtime lower bounds in the case when $U \neq V^\top$ of the form $\Omega(\min(n^{2-o(1)}, \Omega(2^p)))$. Lastly, we demonstrate that our lower bounds are tight by giving an $O(n \cdot \text{poly}(k, 2^p, 1/\epsilon))$ time relative error approximation algorithm and a fast $O(n \cdot \text{poly}(k, p, 1/\epsilon))$ additive error approximation using fast tensor-based sketching. Additionally, since our low rank algorithms rely on matrix-vector product subroutines, our lower bounds extend to show that computing $f(UV)W$, for even a small matrix $W$, requires $\Omega(n^{2-o(1)})$ time.