On the Statistical Complexity of Sample Amplification
0
↗️
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The "sample amplification" problem is about taking a small set of i.i.d. (independent and identically distributed) samples from an unknown distribution and producing a larger set of samples that are indistinguishable from the original distribution.
- This paper aims to provide a rigorous statistical foundation for this problem, including deriving amplification procedures, lower bound techniques, and connections to existing statistical concepts.
- The techniques in this paper apply to a broad class of distributions, including the exponential family, and establish a close relationship between sample amplification and distribution learning.
Plain English Explanation
The "sample amplification" problem is about taking a small set of data points that were randomly drawn from an unknown distribution, and then using those points to generate a larger set of data that looks like it was also randomly drawn from that same distribution.
In other words, if you had 100 data points that were randomly sampled from some real-world phenomenon, the goal would be to use those 100 points to create 1000 more points that are statistically indistinguishable from the original 100. This could be useful in situations where you need a larger dataset to train a machine learning model, but you only have access to a small amount of real data.
The key insight from this paper is that there are rigorous statistical techniques that can be used to accomplish this kind of sample amplification. The researchers developed procedures that can take a small set of samples and expand them into a larger set, while ensuring the expanded set still accurately represents the original unknown distribution.
These techniques apply to a wide variety of probability distributions, including common ones like the exponential distribution. By connecting sample amplification to the broader field of distribution learning, the paper shows how this problem is fundamentally about understanding and modeling the underlying data-generating process.
Technical Explanation
The paper formalizes the "sample amplification" problem as follows: Given a set of n independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) samples drawn from an unknown distribution P, when is it possible to produce a larger set of n+m samples that are indistinguishable from n+m i.i.d. samples drawn directly from P?
The researchers develop generally applicable amplification procedures, lower bound techniques, and connections to existing statistical notions. These techniques are shown to work for a broad class of distributions, including the exponential family.
A key insight is the rigorous connection between sample amplification and distribution learning. This allows the researchers to leverage statistical learning theory to establish fundamental limits and guarantees for sample amplification.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a strong theoretical foundation for the sample amplification problem, deriving general techniques and connecting it to broader concepts in statistics and machine learning. However, the analysis is mostly focused on the asymptotic behavior and worst-case complexity.
An important caveat is that the paper does not extensively explore the practical considerations and challenges of implementing these sample amplification procedures in real-world scenarios. The techniques may be sensitive to factors like the quality and quantity of the initial samples, the specific form of the target distribution, and computational constraints.
Further research could investigate more empirical aspects, such as the finite-sample performance, robustness to modeling errors, and the interplay between amplification and downstream tasks like prediction or hypothesis testing. Exploring connections to other data augmentation techniques used in machine learning could also yield valuable insights.
Conclusion
This paper lays important groundwork for understanding the fundamental limits and possibilities of sample amplification - the task of generating a larger dataset from a smaller one while preserving the underlying distribution. By deriving general techniques and connecting this problem to core concepts in statistics and machine learning, the researchers have provided a firm theoretical basis for further advances in this area.
While the analysis is primarily focused on asymptotic behavior, the insights and techniques developed here could have significant practical implications for fields that rely on limited or expensive data, such as scientific research, personalized medicine, and certain machine learning applications. Continued research in this direction has the potential to unlock new ways of extracting maximal value from small datasets.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
↗️
0
On the Statistical Complexity of Sample Amplification
Brian Axelrod, Shivam Garg, Yanjun Han, Vatsal Sharan, Gregory Valiant
The ``sample amplification'' problem formalizes the following question: Given $n$ i.i.d. samples drawn from an unknown distribution $P$, when is it possible to produce a larger set of $n+m$ samples which cannot be distinguished from $n+m$ i.i.d. samples drawn from $P$? In this work, we provide a firm statistical foundation for this problem by deriving generally applicable amplification procedures, lower bound techniques and connections to existing statistical notions. Our techniques apply to a large class of distributions including the exponential family, and establish a rigorous connection between sample amplification and distribution learning.
Read more9/19/2024
🧠
0
Sample Amplification: Increasing Dataset Size even when Learning is Impossible
Brian Axelrod, Shivam Garg, Vatsal Sharan, Gregory Valiant
Given data drawn from an unknown distribution, $D$, to what extent is it possible to ``amplify'' this dataset and output an even larger set of samples that appear to have been drawn from $D$? We formalize this question as follows: an $(n,m)$ $text{amplification procedure}$ takes as input $n$ independent draws from an unknown distribution $D$, and outputs a set of $m > n$ ``samples''. An amplification procedure is valid if no algorithm can distinguish the set of $m$ samples produced by the amplifier from a set of $m$ independent draws from $D$, with probability greater than $2/3$. Perhaps surprisingly, in many settings, a valid amplification procedure exists, even when the size of the input dataset, $n$, is significantly less than what would be necessary to learn $D$ to non-trivial accuracy. Specifically we consider two fundamental settings: the case where $D$ is an arbitrary discrete distribution supported on $le k$ elements, and the case where $D$ is a $d$-dimensional Gaussian with unknown mean, and fixed covariance. In the first case, we show that an $left(n, n + Theta(frac{n}{sqrt{k}})right)$ amplifier exists. In particular, given $n=O(sqrt{k})$ samples from $D$, one can output a set of $m=n+1$ datapoints, whose total variation distance from the distribution of $m$ i.i.d. draws from $D$ is a small constant, despite the fact that one would need quadratically more data, $n=Theta(k)$, to learn $D$ up to small constant total variation distance. In the Gaussian case, we show that an $left(n,n+Theta(frac{n}{sqrt{d}} )right)$ amplifier exists, even though learning the distribution to small constant total variation distance requires $Theta(d)$ samples. In both the discrete and Gaussian settings, we show that these results are tight, to constant factors. Beyond these results, we formalize a number of curious directions for future research along this vein.
Read more8/27/2024
🌐
0
Unified Mechanism-Specific Amplification by Subsampling and Group Privacy Amplification
Jan Schuchardt, Mihail Stoian, Arthur Kosmala, Stephan Gunnemann
Amplification by subsampling is one of the main primitives in machine learning with differential privacy (DP): Training a model on random batches instead of complete datasets results in stronger privacy. This is traditionally formalized via mechanism-agnostic subsampling guarantees that express the privacy parameters of a subsampled mechanism as a function of the original mechanism's privacy parameters. We propose the first general framework for deriving mechanism-specific guarantees, which leverage additional information beyond these parameters to more tightly characterize the subsampled mechanism's privacy. Such guarantees are of particular importance for privacy accounting, i.e., tracking privacy over multiple iterations. Overall, our framework based on conditional optimal transport lets us derive existing and novel guarantees for approximate DP, accounting with R'enyi DP, and accounting with dominating pairs in a unified, principled manner. As an application, we analyze how subsampling affects the privacy of groups of multiple users. Our tight mechanism-specific bounds outperform tight mechanism-agnostic bounds and classic group privacy results.
Read more6/12/2024
🎲
0
The Sample Complexity of Smooth Boosting and the Tightness of the Hardcore Theorem
Guy Blanc, Alexandre Hayderi, Caleb Koch, Li-Yang Tan
Smooth boosters generate distributions that do not place too much weight on any given example. Originally introduced for their noise-tolerant properties, such boosters have also found applications in differential privacy, reproducibility, and quantum learning theory. We study and settle the sample complexity of smooth boosting: we exhibit a class that can be weak learned to $gamma$-advantage over smooth distributions with $m$ samples, for which strong learning over the uniform distribution requires $tilde{Omega}(1/gamma^2)cdot m$ samples. This matches the overhead of existing smooth boosters and provides the first separation from the setting of distribution-independent boosting, for which the corresponding overhead is $O(1/gamma)$. Our work also sheds new light on Impagliazzo's hardcore theorem from complexity theory, all known proofs of which can be cast in the framework of smooth boosting. For a function $f$ that is mildly hard against size-$s$ circuits, the hardcore theorem provides a set of inputs on which $f$ is extremely hard against size-$s'$ circuits. A downside of this important result is the loss in circuit size, i.e. that $s' ll s$. Answering a question of Trevisan, we show that this size loss is necessary and in fact, the parameters achieved by known proofs are the best possible.
Read more9/19/2024