BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Howard Karloff

Howard Karloff contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Data Structures and AlgorithmsComputational ComplexityDatabasesMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2016arXiv

Online Sparse Linear Regression

We consider the online sparse linear regression problem, which is the problem of sequentially making predictions observing only a limited number of features in each round, to minimize regret with respect to the best sparse linear regressor, where prediction accuracy is measured by square loss. We give an inefficient algorithm that obtains regret bounded by $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ after $T$ prediction rounds. We complement this result by showing that no algorithm running in polynomial time per iteration can achieve regret bounded by $O(T^{1-δ})$ for any constant $δ> 0$ unless $\text{NP} \subseteq \text{BPP}$. This computational hardness result resolves an open problem presented in COLT 2014 (Kale, 2014) and also posed by Zolghadr et al. (2013). This hardness result holds even if the algorithm is allowed to access more features than the best sparse linear regressor up to a logarithmic factor in the dimension.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Fast Algorithms for Constructing Maximum Entropy Summary Trees

Karloff? and Shirley recently proposed summary trees as a new way to visualize large rooted trees (Eurovis 2013) and gave algorithms for generating a maximum-entropy k-node summary tree of an input n-node rooted tree. However, the algorithm generating optimal summary trees was only pseudo-polynomial (and worked only for integral weights); the authors left open existence of a olynomial-time algorithm. In addition, the authors provided an additive approximation algorithm and a greedy heuristic, both working on real weights. This paper shows how to construct maximum entropy k-node summary trees in time O(k^2 n + n log n) for real weights (indeed, as small as the time bound for the greedy heuristic given previously); how to speed up the approximation algorithm so that it runs in time O(n + (k^4/eps?) log(k/eps?)), and how to speed up the greedy algorithm so as to run in time O(kn + n log n). Altogether, these results make summary trees a much more practical tool than before.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Variable Selection is Hard

Variable selection for sparse linear regression is the problem of finding, given an m x p matrix B and a target vector y, a sparse vector x such that Bx approximately equals y. Assuming a standard complexity hypothesis, we show that no polynomial-time algorithm can find a k&#39;-sparse x with ||Bx-y||^2<=h(m,p), where k&#39;=k*2^{log^{1-delta} p} and h(m,p)<=p^(C_1)*m^(1-C_2), where delta>0, C_1>0,C_2>0 are arbitrary. This is true even under the promise that there is an unknown k-sparse vector x^* satisfying Bx^*=y. We prove a similar result for a statistical version of the problem in which the data are corrupted by noise. To the authors&#39; knowledge, these are the first hardness results for sparse regression that apply when the algorithm simultaneously has k&#39;>k and h(m,p)>0.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Distributed Data Placement via Graph Partitioning

With the widespread use of shared-nothing clusters of servers, there has been a proliferation of distributed object stores that offer high availability, reliability and enhanced performance for MapReduce-style workloads. However, relational workloads cannot always be evaluated efficiently using MapReduce without extensive data migrations, which cause network congestion and reduced query throughput. We study the problem of computing data placement strategies that minimize the data communication costs incurred by typical relational query workloads in a distributed setting. Our main contribution is a reduction of the data placement problem to the well-studied problem of {\sc Graph Partitioning}, which is NP-Hard but for which efficient approximation algorithms exist. The novelty and significance of this result lie in representing the communication cost exactly and using standard graphs instead of hypergraphs, which were used in prior work on data placement that optimized for different objectives (not communication cost). We study several practical extensions of the problem: with load balancing, with replication, with materialized views, and with complex query plans consisting of sequences of intermediate operations that may be computed on different servers. We provide integer linear programs (IPs) that may be used with any IP solver to find an optimal data placement. For the no-replication case, we use publicly available graph partitioning libraries (e.g., METIS) to efficiently compute nearly-optimal solutions. For the versions with replication, we introduce two heuristics that utilize the {\sc Graph Partitioning} solution of the no-replication case. Using the TPC-DS workload, it may take an IP solver weeks to compute an optimal data placement, whereas our reduction produces nearly-optimal solutions in seconds.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

On Parsimonious Explanations for 2-D Tree- and Linearly-Ordered Data

This paper studies the &#34;explanation problem&#34; for tree- and linearly-ordered array data, a problem motivated by database applications and recently solved for the one-dimensional tree-ordered case. In this paper, one is given a matrix A whose rows and columns have semantics: special subsets of the rows and special subsets of the columns are meaningful, others are not. A submatrix in A is said to be meaningful if and only if it is the cross product of a meaningful row subset and a meaningful column subset, in which case we call it an &#34;allowed rectangle.&#34; The goal is to &#34;explain&#34; A as a sparse sum of weighted allowed rectangles. Specifically, we wish to find as few weighted allowed rectangles as possible such that, for all i,j, a_{ij} equals the sum of the weights of all rectangles which include cell (i,j). In this paper we consider the natural cases in which the matrix dimensions are tree-ordered or linearly-ordered. In the tree-ordered case, we are given a rooted tree T1 whose leaves are the rows of A and another, T2, whose leaves are the columns. Nodes of the trees correspond in an obvious way to the sets of their leaf descendants. In the linearly-ordered case, a set of rows or columns is meaningful if and only if it is contiguous. For tree-ordered data, we prove the explanation problem NP-Hard and give a randomized 2-approximation algorithm for it. For linearly-ordered data, we prove the explanation problem NP-Hard and give a 2.56-approximation algorithm. To our knowledge, these are the first results for the problem of sparsely and exactly representing matrices by weighted rectangles.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access