Download presentation

1
**Matroids from Lossless Expander Graphs**

Maria-Florina Balcan Georgia Tech Nick Harvey U. Waterloo TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AAAAAAA

2
**Matroids Ground Set V Family of Independent Sets I Axioms:**

; 2 I “nonempty” J ½ I 2 I ) J 2 I “downwards closed” J, I 2 I and |J|<|I| ) 9x2InJ s.t. J+x 2 I “maximum-size sets can be found greedily” Rank function: r(S) = max { |I| : I2I and IµS }

3
**Partition Matroid . . This is a matroid**

· 2 · 2 V A1 A2 This is a matroid In general, if V = A1 [ [ Ak, then is a partition matroid . .

4
Intersecting Ai’s · 2 · 2 V a b c d e f g h i j k l A1 A2 Topic of This Talk: What if Ai’s intersect? Then I is not a matroid. For example, {a,b,k,l} and {f,g,h} are both maximal sets in I.

5
**A fix After truncating the rank to 3, then {a,b,k,l}I.**

· 2 · 2 V a b c d e f g h i j k l A1 A2 After truncating the rank to 3, then {a,b,k,l}I. Checking a few cases shows that I is a matroid.

6
**A general fix (for two Ai’s)**

· b1 · b2 V a b c d e f g h i j k l A1 A2 This works for any A1,A2 and bounds b1,b2 (unless b1+b2-|A1ÅA2|<0) Summary: There is a matroid that’s like a partition matroid, if bi’s large relative to |A1ÅA2|

7
**The Main Question Let V = A1[[Ak and b1,,bk2N**

Is there a matroid s.t. r(Ai) · bi 8i r(S) is “as large as possible” for SAi (this is not formal) If Ai’s are disjoint, solution is partition matroid If Ai’s are “almost disjoint”, can we find a matroid that’s “almost” a partition matroid? Next: formalize this

8
**Lossless Expander Graphs**

U V Definition: G =(U[V, E) is a (D,K,²)-lossless expander if Every u2U has degree D |¡ (S)| ¸ (1-²)¢D¢|S| SµU with |S|·K, where ¡ (S) = { v2V : 9u2S s.t. {u,v}2E } “Every small left-set has nearly-maximal number of right-neighbors” This is basically a result of Kahale.

9
**Lossless Expander Graphs**

U V Definition: G =(U[V, E) is a (D,K,²)-lossless expander if Every u2U has degree D |¡ (S)| ¸ (1-²)¢D¢|S| SµU with |S|·K, where ¡ (S) = { v2V : 9u2S s.t. {u,v}2E } “Neighborhoods of left-vertices are K-wise-almost-disjoint” Why “lossless”? Spectral techniques cannot obtain ² < 1/2.

10
**Trivial Example: Disjoint Neighborhoods**

U V Definition: G =(U[V, E) is a (D,K,²)-lossless expander if Every u2U has degree D |¡ (S)| ¸ (1-²)¢D¢|S| SµU with |S|·K, where ¡ (S) = { v2V : 9u2S s.t. {u,v}2E } If left-vertices have disjoint neighborhoods, this gives an expander with ²=0, K=1

11
**Main Theorem: Trivial Case**

· b1 · b2 V U A2 Suppose G =(U[V, E) has disjoint left-neighborhoods. Let A={A1,…,Ak} be defined by A = { ¡(u) : u2U }. Let b1, …, bk be non-negative integers. Theorem: is family of independent sets of a matroid.

12
**Main Theorem A1 A2 Let G =(U[V, E) be a (D,K,²)-lossless expander**

Let A={A1,…,Ak} be defined by A = { ¡(u) : u2U } Let b1, …, bk satisfy bi ¸ 4²D 8i A1 · b1 · b2 A2

13
**Main Theorem Let G =(U[V, E) be a (D,K,²)-lossless expander**

Let A={A1,…,Ak} be defined by A = { ¡(u) : u2U } Let b1, …, bk satisfy bi ¸ 4²D 8i “Wishful Thinking”: I is a matroid, where

14
**Main Theorem Let G =(U[V, E) be a (D,K,²)-lossless expander**

Let A={A1,…,Ak} be defined by A = { ¡(u) : u2U } Let b1, …, bk satisfy bi ¸ 4²D 8i Theorem: I is a matroid, where Bound on |I| should be min { sum b_j - (error for K) : |J| = K/2 } This is >= (4 eps D) K / 2 – eps D K = epsilon D K

15
Main Theorem Let G =(U[V, E) be a (D,K,²)-lossless expander Let A={A1,…,Ak} be defined by A = { ¡(u) : u2U } Let b1, …, bk satisfy bi ¸ 4²D 8i Theorem: I is a matroid, where Trivial case: G has disjoint neighborhoods, i.e., K=1 and ²=0. = 0 = 0 = 1 Wait: epsilon * K is undefined! But it’s OK, we can take epsilon = 1/4D. G is certainly still a 1/4D expander. The lower bound on b_i is now 1. And now that term goes to infinity. = 1

16
**Application: Paving Matroids**

Paving matroids can also be constructed by the main theorem A paving matroid is a matroid of rank D where every circuit has cardinality either D or D+1 A1 A2 ; V A3 Distance = 2D – 2|Ai n Aj| => |Ai n Aj| = D – Distance/2 Expansion is (1-eps) 2 D = 2D – 2|Ai n Aj| Epsilon = |Ai n Aj| / D = 1 – Distance / (2D) Epsilon*D = D- Distance/2 Ak

17
**Application: Paving Matroids**

Paving matroids can also be constructed by the main theorem A paving matroid is a matroid of rank D where every circuit has cardinality either D or D+1 Sketch: Let A={A1,...,Ak} be the circuits of cardinality D A is a code of constant weight D and distance ¸ 4 This gives a (D,K,²)-expander with K=2 and ²=1-2/D Plugging this into the main theorem gives it (Actually, you need a more precise version from our paper) Distance = 2D – 2|Ai n Aj| => |Ai n Aj| = D – Distance/2 Expansion is (1-eps) 2 D = 2D – 2|Ai n Aj| Epsilon = |Ai n Aj| / D = 1 – Distance / (2D) Epsilon*D = D- Distance/2

18
**LB for Learning Submodular Functions**

; V A1 log2 n A2 Similar idea to paving matroid construction, except we need “deeper valleys” If there are many valleys, the algorithm can’t learn all of them

19
**LB for Learning Submodular Functions**

Let G =(U[V, E) be a (D,K,²)-lossless expander, where Ai = ¡(ui) and |V|=n − |U|=nlog n D = K = n1/3 − ² = log2(n)/n1/3 Such graphs exist by the probabilistic method Sketch: Delete each node in U with prob. ½, then use main theorem to get a matroid If ui2U was not deleted then r(Ai) · bi = 4²D = O(log2 n) Claim: If ui deleted then Ai 2 I (Needs a proof) ) r(Ai) = |Ai| = D = n1/3 Since # Ai’s = |U| = nlog n, no algorithm can learn a significant fraction of r(Ai) values in polynomial time

20
**Lemma: Let I be defined by**

where f : C ! Z is some function. For any I 2 I, let be the “tight sets” for I. Suppose that Then I is independent sets of a matroid. Proof: Let J,I 2 I and |J|<|I|. Must show 9x2InJ s.t. J+x 2 I. Let C be the maximal set in T(J). Then |IÅC| · f(C) = |JÅC|. Since |I|>|J|, 9x in In(C [ J). We must have J+x 2 I, because every C’3x has C’T(J). So |(J+x) Å C’|·f(C’). So J+x 2 I. C J I x

21
Concluding Remarks A new family of matroids that give a common generalization of partition & paving matroids Useful if you want... a partition matroid, but the sets are not a partition a paving matroid with deeper “valleys” Matroids came from analyzing learnability of submodular functions. Imply a (n1/3) lower bound Nearly matches O(n1/2) upper bound

22
**Open Questions Other applications of these matroids?**

n1/2 lower bound for learning submodular functions? Are these matroids “maximal” s.t. |IÅAi|·bi? Are these matroids linear?

Similar presentations

OK

The Chain Rule Rule for finding the derivative of a composition of two functions. If y is a function of u and u is a function of x, then y is a function.

The Chain Rule Rule for finding the derivative of a composition of two functions. If y is a function of u and u is a function of x, then y is a function.

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Download maths ppt on number system for class 9 Ppt on field study in education Ppt on interest rate risk Ppt on carbon dioxide laser Ppt on indian intelligence agencies Ppt on online banking in india Ppt on world heritage day Ppt on acc cement company Ppt on recurrent abortion Ppt on time management and stress management