1 / 31

Ryan O'Donnell (CMU) Yi Wu (CMU, IBM) Yuan Zhou (CMU)

Optimal lower bounds for Locality Sensitive Hashing. (except when q is tiny). Ryan O'Donnell (CMU) Yi Wu (CMU, IBM) Yuan Zhou (CMU). Locality Sensitive Hashing [Indyk-Motwani '98]. h :. objects. sketches. H : family of hash functions h s.t.

ishmael-zamora
Download Presentation

Ryan O'Donnell (CMU) Yi Wu (CMU, IBM) Yuan Zhou (CMU)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Optimal lower bounds for Locality Sensitive Hashing (except when q is tiny) Ryan O'Donnell (CMU) Yi Wu (CMU, IBM) Yuan Zhou (CMU)

  2. Locality Sensitive Hashing [Indyk-Motwani '98] h : objects sketches H: familyof hash functions h s.t. “similar” objects collide w/ high prob. “dissimilar” objects collide w/ low prob.

  3. Abbreviated history

  4. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 Min-wise hash functions [Broder '98] word 1? word 2? word 3? word d? A B Jaccard similarity: Invented simple Hs.t. Pr[h(A) = h(B)] =

  5. 1000+ cites Indyk-Motwani '98 Defined LSH. Invented very simple H good for {0, 1}d under Hamming distance. Showed good LSH implies good nearest-neighbor-search data structs.

  6. Google Patented by . Charikar '02, STOC Proposed alternate H (“simhash”) for Jaccard similarity.

  7. Many papers about LSH

  8. Practice Theory [Broder ’97] Free code base [AI’04] [Indyk–Motwani ’98] Sequence comparisonin bioinformatics [Gionis–Indyk–Motwani ’98] [Charikar ’02] Association-rule findingin data mining [Datar–Immorlica– –Indyk–Mirrokni ’04] [Motwani–Naor–Panigrahi ’06] Collaborative filtering [Andoni–Indyk ’06] Clustering nouns bymeaning in NLP [Tenesawa–Tanaka ’07] [Andoni–Indyk ’08, CACM] Pose estimation in vision [Neylon ’10] • • •

  9. ≤ r ≥ cr Given: (X, dist), r > 0, c > 1 distance space “radius” “approx factor” Goal: Family Hof functions X → S (Scan be any finite set) s.t. ∀ x, y ∈ X, ≥ p ≥ q.25 ≥ q.1 ≥ qρ ≥ q.5 ≤ q

  10. Theorem [IM’98, GIM’98] Given LSH family for (X, dist), can solve “(r,cr)-near-neighbor search”for n points with data structure of size: O(n1+ρ) query time: Õ(nρ) hash fcn evals.

  11. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 Example X = {0,1}d, dist = Hamming r = εd, c = 5 dist ≤εd or ≥5εd [IM’98] H = { h1, h2, …, hd }, hi(x) = xi “output a random coord.”

  12. Analysis = qρ = q (1 − 5ε)1/5 ≈ 1 − ε. ∴ ρ ≈ 1/5 (1 − 5ε)1/5 ≤ 1 − ε. ∴ ρ≤ 1/5 In general, achieves ρ ≤ 1/c, ∀c (∀r).

  13. = ≤ r ≥ cr ρ= 0 positive Optimal upper bound ( {0, 1}d, Ham ), r > 0, c > 1. S≝ {0, 1}d ∪ {✔}, H ≝ {hab : dist(a,b) ≤ r} ✔ if x = a or x = b hab(x) = x otherwise >0.5 >0.1 >0.01 > 0.0001 = 0

  14. The End.Any questions?

  15. Wait, what? Theorem [IM’98, GIM’98] Given LSH family for (X, dist), can solve “(r,cr)-near-neighbor search”for n points with data structure of size: O(n1+ρ) query time: Õ(nρ) hash fcn evals.

  16. Wait, what? Theorem [IM’98, GIM’98] Given LSH family for (X, dist), can solve “(r,cr)-near-neighbor search”for n points with data structure of size: O(n1+ρ) query time: Õ(nρ) hash fcn evals. q ≥ n-o(1) ("not tiny") assuming

  17. More results For Rd with ℓp-distance: when p = 1, 0 < p < 1, p = 2 [IM’98] [DIIM’04] [AI’06] For Jaccard similarity: ρ ≤ 1/c [Bro’98] For {0,1}d with Hamming distance: [MNP’06] −od(1) (assuming q ≥ 2−o(d)) immediately for ℓp-distance

  18. Our Theorem For {0,1}d with Hamming distance: (∃ r s.t.) −od(1) (assuming q ≥ 2−o(d)) immediately for ℓp-distance Proof also yields ρ ≥ 1/c for Jaccard.

  19. Proof

  20. Proof : Noise-stability is log-convex.

  21. Proof : A definition, and two lemmas.

  22. 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Definition: Noise stability at e-т Fix any arbitrary function h : {0,1}d → S. Pick x ∈ {0,1}d at random: x = h(x) = s Flip each bit w.p. (1-e-2т)/2 independenttly h(y) = s’ y = def:

  23. τ Lemma 1: τ For x y, 0 logKh(τ) dist(x, y) = o(d) w.v.h.p. ≈ when τ ≪ 1. Proof: Chernoff bound and Taylor expansion. Lemma 2: Kh(τ) is a log-convex function of τ. (for any h) Proof uses Fourier analysis of Boolean functions.

  24. Fourier transformation • Theorem. f : {0, 1}d -> R can be uniquely written as where • Proof. is an orthonormal basis of {f : {0, 1}d -> R}. Fourier coef. Basis fcns.

  25. Lemma 2: Kh(τ) is a log-convex function of τ. Let hi(x) = 1h(x)=i . Proof:

  26. =

  27. Lemma 2: Kh(τ) is a log-convex function of τ. Let hi(x) = 1h(x)=i . Proof: non-neg comb. of log-convex fcns.

  28. τ Lemma 1: τ For x y, 0 logKh(τ) dist(x, y) = o(d) w.v.h.p. ≈ when τ ≪ 1. Lemma 2: Kh(τ) is a log-convex function of τ. (for any h) Theorem: LSH for {0,1}d requires .

  29. in truth, q+2−Θ(d); we assume q not tiny Proof: Say H is an LSH family for {0,1}d with params (εd + o(d), cεd - o(d), qρ, q) . (c − o(1)) r r def: (Non-neg. lin. comb. of log-convex fcns. ∴ KH(τ) is also log-convex.) ∴ KH(ε) ≳ qρ w.v.h.p., dist(x,y) ≈ (1 - e-т)d ≈ тd KH(cε) ≲ q

  30. 1 ρln q≤ ln q c 1 ln ∴KH(0) = 0 ln qρ ∴ KH(ε) ≳ ρ ln q KH(τ) is log-convex q ln ln q KH(cε) ≲ ε cε τ 0 1 ln q c ln q ln KH(τ) ∴

  31. The End.Any questions?

More Related