Supermodular Locality Sensitive Hashes

In this work, we show deep connections between Locality Sensitive Hashability and submodular analysis. We show that the LSHablility of the most commonly analyzed set similarities is in one-to-one correspondance with the supermodularity of these similarities when taken with respect to the symmetric difference of their arguments. We find that the supermodularity of equivalent LSHable similarities can be dependent on the set encoding. While monotonicity and supermodularity does not imply the metric condition necessary for supermodularity, this condition is guaranteed for the more restricted class of supermodular Hamming similarities that we introduce. We show moreover that LSH preserving transformations are also supermodular-preserving, yielding a way to generate families of similarities both LSHable and supermodular. Finally, we show that even the more restricted family of cardinality-based supermodular Hamming similarities presents promising aspects for the study of the link between LSHability and supermodularity. We hope that the several bridges that we introduce between LSHability and supermodularity paves the way to a better understanding both of supermodular analysis and LSHability, notably in the context of large-scale supermodular optimization.

[1]  Alexander Schrijver,et al.  Combinatorial optimization. Polyhedra and efficiency. , 2003 .

[2]  Matthew B. Blaschko,et al.  The Lovász Hinge: A Novel Convex Surrogate for Submodular Losses , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[3]  Matthew B. Blaschko,et al.  A Convex Surrogate Operator for General Non-Modular Loss Functions , 2016, AISTATS.

[4]  Matthew B. Blaschko,et al.  The Lovász Hinge: A Convex Surrogate for Submodular Losses , 2015, ArXiv.

[5]  Rishabh K. Iyer,et al.  Submodular Hamming Metrics , 2015, NIPS.

[6]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  The Distortion of Locality Sensitive Hashing , 2017, ITCS.

[7]  Satoru Fujishige,et al.  Submodular functions and optimization , 1991 .

[8]  Matthew B. Blaschko Slack and Margin Rescaling as Convex Extensions of Supermodular Functions , 2016, EMMCVPR.

[9]  Matthew B. Blaschko,et al.  The Lovasz-Softmax Loss: A Tractable Surrogate for the Optimization of the Intersection-Over-Union Measure in Neural Networks , 2017, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[10]  Matthew B. Blaschko,et al.  Learning Submodular Losses with the Lovasz Hinge , 2015, ICML.

[11]  Eric Blais,et al.  Testing Submodularity and Other Properties of Valuation Functions , 2017, ITCS.

[12]  Rishabh K. Iyer,et al.  Learning Mixtures of Submodular Functions for Image Collection Summarization , 2014, NIPS.

[13]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  The complexity of LSH feasibility , 2014, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Jan Vondrák,et al.  Is Submodularity Testable? , 2010, Algorithmica.

[15]  Yukiko Yamauchi,et al.  Finding the Submodularity Hidden in Symmetric Difference , 2017, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

[16]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  LSH-Preserving Functions and Their Applications , 2012, SODA.

[17]  Francis R. Bach,et al.  Learning with Submodular Functions: A Convex Optimization Perspective , 2011, Found. Trends Mach. Learn..

[18]  Andrei Z. Broder,et al.  On the resemblance and containment of documents , 1997, Proceedings. Compression and Complexity of SEQUENCES 1997 (Cat. No.97TB100171).

[19]  Alan M. Frieze,et al.  Min-Wise Independent Permutations , 2000, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[20]  Elena Deza,et al.  Encyclopedia of Distances , 2014 .

[21]  Yan Ke,et al.  An efficient parts-based near-duplicate and sub-image retrieval system , 2004, MULTIMEDIA '04.

[22]  Moses Charikar,et al.  Similarity estimation techniques from rounding algorithms , 2002, STOC '02.