Sampling can be faster than optimization

Optimization algorithms and Monte Carlo sampling algorithms have provided the computational foundations for the rapid growth in applications of statistical machine learning in recent years. There is, however, limited theoretical understanding of the relationships between these 2 kinds of methodology...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS Vol. 116; no. 42; pp. 20881 - 20885
Main Authors Ma, Yi-An, Chen, Yuansi, Jin, Chi, Flammarion, Nicolas, Jordan, Michael I.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States National Academy of Sciences 15.10.2019
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Optimization algorithms and Monte Carlo sampling algorithms have provided the computational foundations for the rapid growth in applications of statistical machine learning in recent years. There is, however, limited theoretical understanding of the relationships between these 2 kinds of methodology, and limited understanding of relative strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, existing results have been obtained primarily in the setting of convex functions (for optimization) and log-concave functions (for sampling). In this setting, where local properties determine global properties, optimization algorithms are unsurprisingly more efficient computationally than sampling algorithms. We instead examine a class of nonconvex objective functions that arise in mixture modeling and multistable systems. In this nonconvex setting, we find that the computational complexity of sampling algorithms scales linearly with the model dimension while that of optimization algorithms scales exponentially.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
Author contributions: Y.-A.M., Y.C., C.J., N.F., and M.I.J. designed research, performed research, and wrote the paper.
Contributed by Michael I. Jordan, June 23, 2019 (sent for review November 26, 2018; reviewed by Eric Moulines and Ryan Joseph Tibshirani)
Reviewers: E.M., École Nationale Supérieure des Télécommunications; and R.J.T., Carnegie Mellon University.
ISSN:0027-8424
1091-6490
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.1820003116