Near Neighbor: Who is the Fairest of Them All?

June 06, 2019 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› Neural Information Processing Systems

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Sariel Har-Peled, Sepideh Mahabadi arXiv ID 1906.02640 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.CG, cs.DS, stat.ML Citations 22 Venue Neural Information Processing Systems Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
$\newcommand{\ball}{\mathbb{B}}\newcommand{\dsQ}{\mathcal{Q}}\newcommand{\dsS}{\mathcal{S}}$In this work we study a fair variant of the near neighbor problem. Namely, given a set of $n$ points $P$ and a parameter $r$, the goal is to preprocess the points, such that given a query point $q$, any point in the $r$-neighborhood of the query, i.e., $\ball(q,r)$, have the same probability of being reported as the near neighbor. We show that LSH based algorithms can be made fair, without a significant loss in efficiency. Specifically, we show an algorithm that reports a point in the $r$-neighborhood of a query $q$ with almost uniform probability. The query time is proportional to $O\bigl( \mathrm{dns}(q.r) \dsQ(n,c) \bigr)$, and its space is $O(\dsS(n,c))$, where $\dsQ(n,c)$ and $\dsS(n,c)$ are the query time and space of an LSH algorithm for $c$-approximate near neighbor, and $\mathrm{dns}(q,r)$ is a function of the local density around $q$. Our approach works more generally for sampling uniformly from a sub-collection of sets of a given collection and can be used in a few other applications. Finally, we run experiments to show performance of our approach on real data.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted