Low-distortion Subspace Embeddings in Input-sparsity Time and Applications to Robust Linear Regression

Low-distortion embeddings are critical building blocks for developing random sampling and random projection algorithms for linear algebra problems. We show that, given a matrix $A \in \R^{n \times d}$ with $n \gg d$ and a $p \in [1, 2)$, with a constant probability, we can construct a low-distortion embedding matrix \Pi \in \R^{O(\poly(d)) \times n} that embeds \A_p, the $\ell_p$ subspace spanned by $A$'s columns, into (\R^{O(\poly(d))}, \| \cdot \|_p); the distortion of our embeddings is only O(\poly(d)), and we can compute $\Pi A$ in O(\nnz(A)) time, i.e., input-sparsity time. Our result generalizes the input-sparsity time $\ell_2$ subspace embedding by Clarkson and Woodruff [STOC'13]; and for completeness, we present a simpler and improved analysis of their construction for $\ell_2$. These input-sparsity time $\ell_p$ embeddings are optimal, up to constants, in terms of their running time; and the improved running time propagates to applications such as $(1\pm \epsilon)$-distortion $\ell_p$ subspace embedding and relative-error $\ell_p$ regression. For $\ell_2$, we show that a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximate solution to the $\ell_2$ regression problem specified by the matrix $A$ and a vector $b \in \R^n$ can be computed in O(\nnz(A) + d^3 \log(d/\epsilon) /\epsilon^2) time; and for $\ell_p$, via a subspace-preserving sampling procedure, we show that a $(1\pm \epsilon)$-distortion embedding of \A_p into \R^{O(\poly(d))} can be computed in O(\nnz(A) \cdot \log n) time, and we also show that a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximate solution to the $\ell_p$ regression problem $\min_{x \in \R^d} \|A x - b\|_p$ can be computed in O(\nnz(A) \cdot \log n + \poly(d) \log(1/\epsilon)/\epsilon^2) time. Moreover, we can improve the embedding dimension or equivalently the sample size to $O(d^{3+p/2} \log(1/\epsilon) / \epsilon^2)$ without increasing the complexity.Comment: 22 page

Uniform Sampling for Matrix Approximation

Random sampling has become a critical tool in solving massive matrix problems. For linear regression, a small, manageable set of data rows can be randomly selected to approximate a tall, skinny data matrix, improving processing time significantly. For theoretical performance guarantees, each row must be sampled with probability proportional to its statistical leverage score. Unfortunately, leverage scores are difficult to compute. A simple alternative is to sample rows uniformly at random. While this often works, uniform sampling will eliminate critical row information for many natural instances. We take a fresh look at uniform sampling by examining what information it does preserve. Specifically, we show that uniform sampling yields a matrix that, in some sense, well approximates a large fraction of the original. While this weak form of approximation is not enough for solving linear regression directly, it is enough to compute a better approximation. This observation leads to simple iterative row sampling algorithms for matrix approximation that run in input-sparsity time and preserve row structure and sparsity at all intermediate steps. In addition to an improved understanding of uniform sampling, our main proof introduces a structural result of independent interest: we show that every matrix can be made to have low coherence by reweighting a small subset of its rows

Optimal CUR Matrix Decompositions

The CUR decomposition of an $m \times n$ matrix $A$ finds an $m \times c$ matrix $C$ with a subset of $c < n$ columns of $A,$ together with an $r \times n$ matrix $R$ with a subset of $r < m$ rows of $A,$ as well as a $c \times r$ low-rank matrix $U$ such that the matrix $C U R$ approximates the matrix $A,$ that is, $|| A - CUR ||_F^2 \le (1+\epsilon) || A - A_k||_F^2$, where $||.||_F$ denotes the Frobenius norm and $A_k$ is the best $m \times n$ matrix of rank $k$ constructed via the SVD. We present input-sparsity-time and deterministic algorithms for constructing such a CUR decomposition where $c=O(k/\epsilon)$ and $r=O(k/\epsilon)$ and rank$(U) = k$. Up to constant factors, our algorithms are simultaneously optimal in $c, r,$ and rank$(U)$.Comment: small revision in lemma 4.