On Testing Convexity and Submodularity Michal Parnas Dana Ron Ronitt Rubinfeld.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Algorithm Analysis Input size Time I1 T1 I2 T2 …
Advertisements

Numerical Linear Algebra in the Streaming Model Ken Clarkson - IBM David Woodruff - IBM.
Lecture 24 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck
Size-estimation framework with applications to transitive closure and reachability Presented by Maxim Kalaev Edith Cohen AT&T Bell Labs 1996.
Fast Algorithms For Hierarchical Range Histogram Constructions
Discussion #33 Adjacency Matrices. Topics Adjacency matrix for a directed graph Reachability Algorithmic Complexity and Correctness –Big Oh –Proofs of.
1 Distribution-free testing algorithms for monomials with a sublinear number of queries Elya Dolev & Dana Ron Tel-Aviv University.
Basic Feasible Solutions: Recap MS&E 211. WILL FOLLOW A CELEBRATED INTELLECTUAL TEACHING TRADITION.
Bundling Equilibrium in Combinatorial Auctions Written by: Presented by: Ron Holzman Rica Gonen Noa Kfir-Dahav Dov Monderer Moshe Tennenholtz.
Theoretical Program Checking Greg Bronevetsky. Background The field of Program Checking is about 13 years old. Pioneered by Manuel Blum, Hal Wasserman,
Christian Sohler | Every Property of Hyperfinite Graphs is Testable Ilan Newman and Christian Sohler.
Artur Czumaj Dept of Computer Science & DIMAP University of Warwick Testing Expansion in Bounded Degree Graphs Joint work with Christian Sohler.
Property Testing: A Learning Theory Perspective Dana Ron Tel Aviv University.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture12: Reductions Prof. Amos Israeli.
Oded Goldreich Shafi Goldwasser Dana Ron February 13, 1998 Max-Cut Property Testing by Ori Rosen.
Proclaiming Dictators and Juntas or Testing Boolean Formulae Michal Parnas Dana Ron Alex Samorodnitsky.
Testing the Diameter of Graphs Michal Parnas Dana Ron.
CPSC 689: Discrete Algorithms for Mobile and Wireless Systems Spring 2009 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
Dynamic Programming1. 2 Outline and Reading Matrix Chain-Product (§5.3.1) The General Technique (§5.3.2) 0-1 Knapsack Problem (§5.3.3)
NP-Complete Problems Reading Material: Chapter 10 Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4 only.
Testing of Clustering Noga Alon, Seannie Dar Michal Parnas, Dana Ron.
Approximation Algorithms
Evaluating Hypotheses
Michael Bender - SUNY Stony Brook Dana Ron - Tel Aviv University Testing Acyclicity of Directed Graphs in Sublinear Time.
Testing Metric Properties Michal Parnas and Dana Ron.
On Proximity Oblivious Testing Oded Goldreich - Weizmann Institute of Science Dana Ron – Tel Aviv University.
1 On the Benefits of Adaptivity in Property Testing of Dense Graphs Joint work with Mira Gonen Dana Ron Tel-Aviv University.
Clustering In Large Graphs And Matrices Petros Drineas, Alan Frieze, Ravi Kannan, Santosh Vempala, V. Vinay Presented by Eric Anderson.
1 Algorithmic Aspects in Property Testing of Dense Graphs Oded Goldreich – Weizmann Institute Dana Ron - Tel-Aviv University.
1 On the Benefits of Adaptivity in Property Testing of Dense Graphs Joint works with Mira Gonen and Oded Goldreich Dana Ron Tel-Aviv University.
Preference Analysis Joachim Giesen and Eva Schuberth May 24, 2006.
Chapter 11: Limitations of Algorithmic Power
Approximation Algorithms for MAX-MIN tiling Authors Piotr Berman, Bhaskar DasGupta, S. Muthukrishman S. Muthukrishman Published on Journal of Algorithms,
Dynamic Programming Reading Material: Chapter 7 Sections and 6.
Tutorial 10 Iterative Methods and Matrix Norms. 2 In an iterative process, the k+1 step is defined via: Iterative processes Eigenvector decomposition.
Fundamental Techniques
Experts and Boosting Algorithms. Experts: Motivation Given a set of experts –No prior information –No consistent behavior –Goal: Predict as the best expert.
Evaluation of Relational Operations. Relational Operations v We will consider how to implement: – Selection ( ) Selects a subset of rows from relation.
A Tutorial on Property Testing Dana Ron Tel Aviv University.
WECWIS, June 27, 2002 On the Sensitivity of Incremental Algorithms for Combinatorial Auctions Ryan Kastner, Christina Hsieh, Miodrag Potkonjak, Majid Sarrafzadeh.
Some 3CNF Properties are Hard to Test Eli Ben-Sasson Harvard & MIT Prahladh Harsha MIT Sofya Raskhodnikova MIT.
College Algebra Fifth Edition James Stewart Lothar Redlin Saleem Watson.
1.1 Chapter 1: Introduction What is the course all about? Problems, instances and algorithms Running time v.s. computational complexity General description.
1 Chapter 8 Sensitivity Analysis  Bottom line:   How does the optimal solution change as some of the elements of the model change?  For obvious reasons.
Digital Image Processing, 3rd ed. © 1992–2008 R. C. Gonzalez & R. E. Woods Gonzalez & Woods Matrices and Vectors Objective.
WEEK 8 SYSTEMS OF EQUATIONS DETERMINANTS AND CRAMER’S RULE.
Analysis of Algorithms
Analysis of Algorithms CSCI Previous Evaluations of Programs Correctness – does the algorithm do what it is supposed to do? Generality – does it.
Nonlinear Programming Models
Artur Czumaj DIMAP DIMAP (Centre for Discrete Maths and it Applications) Computer Science & Department of Computer Science University of Warwick Testing.
6.853: Topics in Algorithmic Game Theory Fall 2011 Constantinos Daskalakis Lecture 22.
Complexity and Efficient Algorithms Group / Department of Computer Science Testing the Cluster Structure of Graphs Christian Sohler joint work with Artur.
Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Auctions with Complement-Free Bidders Speaker: Shahar Dobzinski Joint work with Noam Nisan & Michael Schapira.
Implementation of Database Systems, Jarek Gryz1 Evaluation of Relational Operations Chapter 12, Part A.
Compression for Fixed-Width Memories Ori Rottenstriech, Amit Berman, Yuval Cassuto and Isaac Keslassy Technion, Israel.
Database Management Systems 3ed, R. Ramakrishnan and J. Gehrke1 Evaluation of Relational Operations Chapter 14, Part A (Joins)
Linear Programming Chap 2. The Geometry of LP  In the text, polyhedron is defined as P = { x  R n : Ax  b }. So some of our earlier results should.
An Algorithm for the Consecutive Ones Property Claudio Eccher.
Approximation Algorithms based on linear programming.
1 Objective To provide background material in support of topics in Digital Image Processing that are based on matrices and/or vectors. Review Matrices.
From DeGroot & Schervish. Example Occupied Telephone Lines Suppose that a certain business office has five telephone lines and that any number of these.
MTH108 Business Math I Lecture 20.
On Sample Based Testers
On Testing Dynamic Environments
Distributed Submodular Maximization in Massive Datasets
On Learning and Testing Dynamic Environments
CIS 700: “algorithms for Big Data”
Algorithm An algorithm is a finite set of steps required to solve a problem. An algorithm must have following properties: Input: An algorithm must have.
Coverage Approximation Algorithms
The Subgraph Testing Model
Presentation transcript:

On Testing Convexity and Submodularity Michal Parnas Dana Ron Ronitt Rubinfeld

Property Testing (Informal Definition) For a fixed property P and any object O, determine whether O has property P, or whether O is far from having property P (i.e., far from any other object having P ). Task should be performed by querying the object (in as few places as possible). ?? ? ? ?

Examples The object can be a graph (represented by its adjacency matrix), and the property can be 3-colorabilty. The object can be a string and the property can be membership in given regular language. The object can be a function and the property can be linearity.

Property Testing - Background Initially defined by Rubinfeld and Sudan in the context of Program Testing (of algebraic functions). Goldreich Goldwasser and Ron initiated study of testing properties of (undirected) graphs. Growing body of work deals with properties of functions, graphs, strings, sets of points... Many algorithms with complexity that is sub-linear in (or even independent of) size of object.

Motivation Computational: Design testing algorithms that are (much) more efficient than exact decision algorithms for properties. Combinatorial: Gain new understanding about tested property.

Submodular and Supermodular Functions Let I = I 1 I 2  …  I d, d2 be a product space where I q . In particular consider I q ={0,…,n q }. For x,y I define the join of x and y as: (x 1,…,x d )  (y 1,…,y d ) = (min(x 1,y 1 ),…,min(x d,y d ) and the meet as: (x 1,…,x d )  (y 1,…,y d ) = (max(x 1,y 1 ),…,max(x d,y d ) Definition: A function f : I  is submodular if for every x,y I we have f(x  y) + f(x  y)  f(x)+f(y). If inequality holds in opposite direction then f is supermodular.

Monge Matrices - (Important) Special Case of Submodular Functions: d=2 When d=2 represent function by 2-dimensional matrix V={v i,j }, i,j = 0 to n. Matrix is a Monge matrix if for every 0  i < i’  n, 0  j < j’  n, have v i,j +v i’,j’  v i,j’ +v i’,j. If inequality holds in opposite direction then Inverse Monge. v i’,j’ v i’,j v i,j’ v i,j v i’,j - v i,j  v i’,j’ - v i,j’ Suffice that inequality holds for every i,j and i’=i+1, j’=j+1. V i,j V i+1,j V i+1,j+1 V i,j+1

Why are we interested in such functions (matrices)? Submodular functions and specifically Monge matrices, play an important role in combinatorial optimization. For many optimization problems (e.g., transportation problems, searching and selecting, TSP) if the input is a matrix having the Monge (submodular) property, then they can be solved more efficiently.

Testing Inverse Monge Matrices Testing algorithm is given distance parameter  and query access to matrix V (that is, can probe matrix). If V is Inverse Monge then should accept (w.p. 1). If V is - far from any Inverse Monge matrix (that is should modify more than an - fraction of its entries to become Monge) then should reject w.p. at least 2/3. We give an algorithm whose query and time complexity is O(log 2 n/  ).

Characterization of I-Monge Matrices Given matrix V, define matrix C V ’ = {c i,j }, 0  i,j  n : c 0,0 =v 0,0 c 0,j =v 0,j -v 0,j-1 c i,0 =v i,0 -v i-1,0 c i,j = (v i,j -v i-1,j ) - (v i,j-1 -v i-1,j-1 ) Claim1: For every 0  i,j  n, v i,j =  ki  mj c k,m. Claim2: Let C V = {c i,j }, i,j = 1 to n. The matrix V is an I-Monge matrix i.f.f. C V is non-negative. V CV’ CV’ v i,j =  ki  mj c k,m

(Bad) Candidate Testing Algorithm However, in this case there are many sub-matrices of C V with negative sum of elements. Observe: for any sub-matrix of C V, can compute sum of elements given access to V in constant time. Given characterization, natural suggestion is to sample from C V and reject if see negative entry. Doesn’t quite work: V may be far from I-Monge but C V contains only single negative entry. Sum of elements: v i’,j’ - v i-1,j’ – v i’,j-1 + v i-1,j-1 (i’,j)(i’,j’) (i,j’) (i,j) CVCV

Testing Algorithm - Definitions Definition1: A sub-row of C V is called legal if it results from bisecting its row in a recursive manner. A legal sub- column is defined analogously. A sub-matrix is legal if both its rows and its columns are legal.

Testing Algorithm - Definitions Cont’ Definition2: A sub-matrix M of C V is called good if the sum of all its elements is non-negative. Otherwise it is bad. Definition3: We say that (i,j) is good if all legal sub- matrices containing it are good. Otherwise it is bad. (i,j’)(i,j) (i’,j)(i’,j’) M Sum of elements in M: v i’,j’ - v i-1,j’ – v i’,j-1 + v i-1,j-1

Testing Algorithm Test I-Monge * Uniformly and independently select 8/  entries in C V ; * for each entry selected, check that it is good. * If all are good then accept, o.w., reject. Running time of Alg is O(log 2 n/  ) (since each entry is contained in log 2 n legal sub-matrices). If V is I-Monge then Alg always accepts (1-sided error). We show that if V is accepted w.p. > 1/3 then it is  -close to I-Monge.

Analysis of Testing Algorithm If V accepted w.p. > 1/3 then C=C V contains less than  /4 fraction of bad entries. We show that can modify C to obtain non-negative matrix C’={c’ i,j } for which the following holds: The corresponding I-Monge matrix V’={v’ i,j } (that is v’ i,j =  ki  mj c’ k,m ), is  -close to V.

Analysis of Testing Algorithm Cont’ R R is union of good sub-matrices that cover all bad ones. R is at most  -fraction of matrix. Can modify at most all entries of R in C=C V to non- negative entries obtaining C’ so that corresponding V’ does not differ from V outside of R. CVCV v’ i,j = v i,j

Conclusions and Further Research Lower Bounds? Extending result to higher dimensions (that is d>2)? (possibly can be done very similarly in special case of distribution matrices.) What happens to optimization algorithms if matrix is only close to Monge? Give polylog algorithm for testing Monge Matrices. Give logarithmic time algorithm for testing convexity in 1-d.

Analysis of Testing Algorithm I If V accepted w.p. > 1/3 then C=C V contains less than  /4 fraction of bad entries. Can modify C to obtain non-negative matrix C’={c’ i,j } for which the following holds: The corresponding I-Monge matrix V’={v’ i,j } (that is v’ i,j =  i’i  j’j c’ i’,j’ ), is  -close to V. For each bad entry (i,j), consider maximal bad legal sub- matrix M, that contains (i,j). Due to maximality, M is contained in good (legal square) submatrix M’ that is 4 times larger. Consider union R of all such good sub- matrices. R “covers” all bad entries in C and its total area is at most an  -fraction of C. Our goal: Modify only entries of C that belong to R in order to obtain non-negative C’ s.t. corresponding V’ differs from V only in entries (i,j) in R.

Analysis of Testing Algorithm I Cont’ Region R is union of disjoint square submatrices where each is good. That is, for each of these sub-matrices M, every row and every column is non-negative. We shall “re-fill” M so that all its entries become non-negative and the sum of entries in each of its rows and columns remains the same. Hence, analysis reduced to following task: given non-negative values a 1,…,a r and b 1,…,b s such that  a i =  b j, fill r  s matrix with non-negative entries so that the sum of i’th row is a i and the sum of the j’th column is b j. Task can be easily performed by a greedy algorithm.  It follows that for every (i,j) outside of R, the value v’ i,j (which is the sum of entries c’ i’,j’ “below’’ it) is the same as the original value v i,j.

Polylog Testing Algorithm: Sketch of Analysis As in analysis of Alg I, if V accepted w.p. > 1/3 then C=C V contains less than  /4 bad’ entries. Here too consider union R of good’ sub-matrices containing maximal bad’ legal sub- matrices. R as bounded size as before. Do so in an iterative manner, each time “breaking” off a “block” from R, filling it, and modifying constraints on sums of rows and columns in what remains of R. Main difference, R is no longer nice union of disjoint square sub-matrices with non-negative rows and columns. Rather, R is some general “creature” with less stringent constraints on rows and columns. Still, can show how to fill R with non-negative entries so that for every (i,j) not in R, sum of new entries below it is the same as the sum of old entries.

Our Starting Point: Combinatorial Auctions and Submodular Set Functions In Combinatorial Auctions several different items are sold concurrently, and bidders are interested in purchasing subsets of items. Each bidder specifies a valuation function v which assigns each subset of items S a price v(S). Typically assumed that v obeys certain properties. Specifically, that v is a submodular set function. That is: for every two subsets S,T : v(S T) + v(ST)  v(S) + v(T).