triangle inequality
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.13)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Kantō > Tokyo Metropolis Prefecture > Tokyo (0.04)
- Asia > China > Guangdong Province > Shenzhen (0.04)
- Asia > China > Heilongjiang Province > Harbin (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County > Los Angeles (0.27)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > Texas (0.04)
- North America > United States > New Jersey > Mercer County > Princeton (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- North America > United States > Minnesota (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Stanford (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Research Report > New Finding (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.87)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (0.67)
- Asia > China > Hunan Province > Changsha (0.04)
- North America > Canada > British Columbia > Vancouver (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hunan Province > Changsha (0.04)
- North America > United States > California (0.04)
- North America > Canada > British Columbia > Vancouver (0.04)
- (2 more...)
A Proofs
Section A.1 presents the lemmas used to prove the main results. Section A.2 presents the main results The first two inequalities are owing to the triangle inequality, and the third inequality is due to the definition of L-divergence Eq.(5). We complete the proof by applying Lemma A.1 to bound F ollowing the conditions of Theorem 4.1, the upper bound of null V arnull null D Based on the conditions of Theorem 4.1, we assume We complete the proof by applying Lemma A.3 and Lemma A.4 to bound the Rademacher Following the proof of Theorem 4.1, we have |D F ollowing the conditions of Proposition 4.3, as N, we have, null D Based on the result on Proposition 4.3, for any δ (0, 1), we know that 4LB ( 2 D ln 2 + 1)null We complete the proof by applying the triangle inequality. III: Samples from p and q are labeled with 0 and 1, respectively. All values are averaged over five trials.
- North America > United States > Wisconsin > Dane County > Madison (0.04)
- Asia > Afghanistan > Parwan Province > Charikar (0.04)
- North America > United States > New Jersey > Hudson County > Hoboken (0.04)
- (4 more...)