Semi-Direct Sum Theorem and Nearest Neighbor under l_infty

Authors Mark Braverman, Young Kun Ko



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.APPROX-RANDOM.2018.6.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.49 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Mark Braverman
  • Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, 35 Olden St. Princeton NJ 08540, USA
Young Kun Ko
  • Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, 35 Olden St. Princeton NJ 08540, USA

Cite As Get BibTex

Mark Braverman and Young Kun Ko. Semi-Direct Sum Theorem and Nearest Neighbor under l_infty. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2018). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 116, pp. 6:1-6:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2018) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX-RANDOM.2018.6

Abstract

We introduce semi-direct sum theorem as a framework for proving asymmetric communication lower bounds for the functions of the form V_{i=1}^n f(x,y_i). Utilizing tools developed in proving direct sum theorem for information complexity, we show that if the function is of the form V_{i=1}^n f(x,y_i) where Alice is given x and Bob is given y_i's, it suffices to prove a lower bound for a single f(x,y_i). This opens a new avenue of attack other than the conventional combinatorial technique (i.e. "richness lemma" from [Miltersen et al., 1995]) for proving randomized lower bounds for asymmetric communication for functions of such form.
As the main technical result and an application of semi-direct sum framework, we prove an information lower bound on c-approximate Nearest Neighbor (ANN) under l_infty which implies that the algorithm of [Indyk, 2001] for c-approximate Nearest Neighbor under l_infty is optimal even under randomization for both decision tree and cell probe data structure model (under certain parameter assumption for the latter). In particular, this shows that randomization cannot improve [Indyk, 2001] under decision tree model. Previously only a deterministic lower bound was known by [Andoni et al., 2008] and randomized lower bound for cell probe model by [Kapralov and Panigrahy, 2012]. We suspect further applications of our framework in exhibiting randomized asymmetric communication lower bounds for big data applications.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Communication complexity
Keywords
  • Asymmetric Communication Lower Bound
  • Data Structure Lower Bound
  • Nearest Neighbor Search

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Alexandr Andoni, Dorian Croitoru, and Mihai Patrascu. Hardness of nearest neighbor under l-infinity. In Foundations of Computer Science, 2008. FOCS'08. IEEE 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on, pages 424-433. IEEE, 2008. Google Scholar
  2. Boaz Barak, Mark Braverman, Xi Chen, and Anup Rao. How to compress interactive communication. SIAM Journal on Computing, 42(3):1327-1363, 2013. Google Scholar
  3. Mark Braverman. Interactive information complexity. SIAM Journal on Computing, 44(6):1698-1739, 2015. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/130938517.
  4. Mark Braverman, Ankit Garg, Denis Pankratov, and Omri Weinstein. From information to exact communication. In Proceedings of the forty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 151-160. ACM, 2013. Google Scholar
  5. Mark Braverman and Anup Rao. Information equals amortized communication. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 60(10):6058-6069, 2014. Google Scholar
  6. Amit Chakrabarti, Yaoyun Shi, Anthony Wirth, and Andrew Yao. Informational complexity and the direct sum problem for simultaneous message complexity. In Foundations of Computer Science, 2001. Proceedings. 42nd IEEE Symposium on, pages 270-278. IEEE, 2001. Google Scholar
  7. Thomas M Cover and Joy A Thomas. Elements of information theory. John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Google Scholar
  8. Anirban Dasgupta, Ravi Kumar, and D. Sivakumar. Sparse and lopsided set disjointness via information theory. In Anupam Gupta, Klaus Jansen, José Rolim, and Rocco Servedio, editors, Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques, pages 517-528, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  9. Piotr Indyk. On approximate nearest neighbors under l∞ norm. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 63(4):627-638, 2001. Google Scholar
  10. Michael Kapralov and Rina Panigrahy. Nns lower bounds via metric expansion for l∞ and emd. In International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, pages 545-556. Springer, 2012. Google Scholar
  11. Peter Bro Miltersen. Lower bounds for union-split-find related problems on random access machines. In Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 625-634. ACM, 1994. Google Scholar
  12. Peter Bro Miltersen, Noam Nisan, Shmuel Safra, and Avi Wigderson. On data structures and asymmetric communication complexity. In Proceedings of the twenty-seventh annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 103-111. ACM, 1995. Google Scholar
  13. Rina Panigrahy, Kunal Talwar, and Udi Wieder. Lower bounds on near neighbor search via metric expansion. In Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2010 51st Annual IEEE Symposium on, pages 805-814. IEEE, 2010. Google Scholar
  14. Mihai Patrascu. Lower Bound Techniques for Data Structures. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2008. AAI0821553. Google Scholar
  15. Sivaramakrishnan Natarajan Ramamoorthy and Anup Rao. How to compress asymmetric communication. In Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 102-123. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2015. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail