Table of Contents
Fetching ...

On Extended Concentration Inequalities for Fast JL Embeddings of Infinite Sets

Edem Boahen, March T. Boedihardjo, Rafael Chiclana, Mark Iwen

TL;DR

This work tackles the problem of achieving fast Johnson-Lindenstrauss embeddings for infinite subsets of $\mathbb{R}^d$ with embedding dimension $k$ that does not depend on the ambient dimension. It extends the Ailon–Liberty framework by constructing $A=BDHD'$ with a Walsh–Hadamard $H$, 4-wise independent $B$, and random diagonal $D,D'$, and proves a stronger-than-sub-exponential tail bound $\mathbb{P}\{ |\|A x\|_2-1|>t \} \le c_3 \exp(-c_4 k^{2/3} t^{4/3})$ for unit vectors $x$, enabling a chaining-based analysis. A chaining theorem is then established, yielding a d-independent bound on the embedding dimension for infinite sets in terms of covering numbers: $k \ge (C/\epsilon^4)\bigl((\ln(1/p))^{3/4}+\sum_{j\ge0} 2^{-j}(\ln N(S,\|\cdot\|_2,1/2^j))^{3/4}\bigr)^2$, though with suboptimal dependence on the covering numbers. The results demonstrate progress toward d-free embeddings and introduce a tail bound that may be of independent interest, while highlighting the need for tighter control of covering-number terms in future work.

Abstract

The Johnson-Lindenstrauss (JL) lemma allows subsets of a high-dimensional space to be embedded into a lower-dimensional space while approximately preserving all pairwise Euclidean distances. This important result has inspired an extensive literature, with a significant portion dedicated to constructing structured random matrices with fast matrix-vector multiplication algorithms that generate such embeddings for finite point sets. In this paper, we briefly consider fast JL embedding matrices for {\it infinite} subsets of $\mathbb{R}^d$. Prior work in this direction such as \cite{oymak2018isometric, mendelson2023column} has focused on constructing fast JL matrices $HD \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d}$ by multiplying structured matrices with RIP(-like) properties $H \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d}$ against a random diagonal matrix $D \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$. However, utilizing RIP(-like) matrices $H$ in this fashion necessarily has the unfortunate side effect that the resulting embedding dimension $k$ must depend on the ambient dimension $d$ no matter how simple the infinite set is that one aims to embed. Motivated by this, we explore an alternate strategy for removing this $d$-dependence from $k$ herein: Extending a concentration inequality proven by Ailon and Liberty \cite{Ailon2008fast} in the hope of later utilizing it in a chaining argument to obtain a near-optimal result for infinite sets. %, and $(ii)$ utilizing a simple secondary Gaussian embedding of an initial fast JL embedding of a given infinite set. Though this strategy ultimately fails to provide the near-optimal embedding dimension we seek, along the way we obtain a stronger-than-sub-exponential extension of the concentration inequality in \cite{Ailon2008fast} which may be of independent interest.

On Extended Concentration Inequalities for Fast JL Embeddings of Infinite Sets

TL;DR

This work tackles the problem of achieving fast Johnson-Lindenstrauss embeddings for infinite subsets of with embedding dimension that does not depend on the ambient dimension. It extends the Ailon–Liberty framework by constructing with a Walsh–Hadamard , 4-wise independent , and random diagonal , and proves a stronger-than-sub-exponential tail bound for unit vectors , enabling a chaining-based analysis. A chaining theorem is then established, yielding a d-independent bound on the embedding dimension for infinite sets in terms of covering numbers: , though with suboptimal dependence on the covering numbers. The results demonstrate progress toward d-free embeddings and introduce a tail bound that may be of independent interest, while highlighting the need for tighter control of covering-number terms in future work.

Abstract

The Johnson-Lindenstrauss (JL) lemma allows subsets of a high-dimensional space to be embedded into a lower-dimensional space while approximately preserving all pairwise Euclidean distances. This important result has inspired an extensive literature, with a significant portion dedicated to constructing structured random matrices with fast matrix-vector multiplication algorithms that generate such embeddings for finite point sets. In this paper, we briefly consider fast JL embedding matrices for {\it infinite} subsets of . Prior work in this direction such as \cite{oymak2018isometric, mendelson2023column} has focused on constructing fast JL matrices by multiplying structured matrices with RIP(-like) properties against a random diagonal matrix . However, utilizing RIP(-like) matrices in this fashion necessarily has the unfortunate side effect that the resulting embedding dimension must depend on the ambient dimension no matter how simple the infinite set is that one aims to embed. Motivated by this, we explore an alternate strategy for removing this -dependence from herein: Extending a concentration inequality proven by Ailon and Liberty \cite{Ailon2008fast} in the hope of later utilizing it in a chaining argument to obtain a near-optimal result for infinite sets. %, and utilizing a simple secondary Gaussian embedding of an initial fast JL embedding of a given infinite set. Though this strategy ultimately fails to provide the near-optimal embedding dimension we seek, along the way we obtain a stronger-than-sub-exponential extension of the concentration inequality in \cite{Ailon2008fast} which may be of independent interest.
Paper Structure (6 sections, 7 theorems, 35 equations)

This paper contains 6 sections, 7 theorems, 35 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

There is a $k\times d$ random matrix $A$, for which the mapping ${\bf x} \mapsto A {\bf x}$ can be computed in time $\mathcal{O}(d \log k)$, such that for any ${\bf x}\in \mathbb{R}^d$ with $\|{\bf x}\|_2=1$ and $t>0$ for some universal constants $c_3$, $c_4>0$.

Theorems & Definitions (12)

  • Theorem 1.1
  • Theorem 1.2
  • Proposition 2.1: Hoeffding's Inequality
  • Lemma 2.2: Corollary 5.1 from Ailon2008fast
  • Lemma 2.3: Lemma 4.1 from Ailon2008fast
  • Lemma 2.4: Lemma 5.1 from Ailon2008fast
  • Lemma 3.1
  • proof
  • Example 3.2
  • Example 3.3
  • ...and 2 more