Researcher profile

Jakub Tětek

Jakub Tětek contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
7topics
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)

preprint2022arXiv

A Nearly Tight Analysis of Greedy k-means++

The famous $k$-means++ algorithm of Arthur and Vassilvitskii [SODA 2007] is the most popular way of solving the $k$-means problem in practice. The algorithm is very simple: it samples the first center uniformly at random and each of the following $k-1$ centers is then always sampled proportional to its squared distance to the closest center so far. Afterward, Lloyd's iterative algorithm is run. The $k$-means++ algorithm is known to return a $Θ(\log k)$ approximate solution in expectation. In their seminal work, Arthur and Vassilvitskii [SODA 2007] asked about the guarantees for its following \emph{greedy} variant: in every step, we sample $\ell$ candidate centers instead of one and then pick the one that minimizes the new cost. This is also how $k$-means++ is implemented in e.g. the popular Scikit-learn library [Pedregosa et al.; JMLR 2011]. We present nearly matching lower and upper bounds for the greedy $k$-means++: We prove that it is an $O(\ell^3 \log^3 k)$-approximation algorithm. On the other hand, we prove a lower bound of $Ω(\ell^3 \log^3 k / \log^2(\ell\log k))$. Previously, only an $Ω(\ell \log k)$ lower bound was known [Bhattacharya, Eube, Röglin, Schmidt; ESA 2020] and there was no known upper bound.

preprint2022arXiv

Bias Reduction for Sum Estimation

In classical statistics and distribution testing, it is often assumed that elements can be sampled from some distribution $P$, and that when an element $x$ is sampled, the probability $P$ of sampling $x$ is also known. Recent work in distribution testing has shown that many algorithms are robust in the sense that they still produce correct output if the elements are drawn from any distribution $Q$ that is sufficiently close to $P$. This phenomenon raises interesting questions: under what conditions is a "noisy" distribution $Q$ sufficient, and what is the algorithmic cost of coping with this noise? We investigate these questions for the problem of estimating the sum of a multiset of $N$ real values $x_1, \ldots, x_N$. This problem is well-studied in the statistical literature in the case $P = Q$, where the Hansen-Hurwitz estimator is frequently used. We assume that for some known distribution $P$, values are sampled from a distribution $Q$ that is pointwise close to $P$. For every positive integer $k$ we define an estimator $ζ_k$ for $μ= \sum_i x_i$ whose bias is proportional to $γ^k$ (where our $ζ_1$ reduces to the classical Hansen-Hurwitz estimator). As a special case, we show that if $Q$ is pointwise $γ$-close to uniform and all $x_i \in \{0, 1\}$, for any $ε> 0$, we can estimate $μ$ to within additive error $εN$ using $m = Θ({N^{1-\frac{1}{k}} / ε^{2/k}})$ samples, where $k = \left\lceil (\log ε)/(\log γ)\right\rceil$. We show that this sample complexity is essentially optimal. Our bounds show that the sample complexity need not vary uniformly with the desired error parameter $ε$: for some values of $ε$, perturbations in its value have no asymptotic effect on the sample complexity, while for other values, any decrease in its value results in an asymptotically larger sample complexity.

preprint2022arXiv

Edge Sampling and Graph Parameter Estimation via Vertex Neighborhood Accesses

In this paper, we consider the problems from the area of sublinear-time algorithms of edge sampling, edge counting, and triangle counting. Part of our contribution is that we consider three different settings, differing in the way in which one may access the neighborhood of a given vertex. In previous work, people have considered indexed neighbor access, with a query returning the $i$-th neighbor of a given vertex. Full neighborhood access model, which has a query that returns the entire neighborhood at a unit cost, has recently been considered in the applied community. Between these, we propose hash-ordered neighbor access, inspired by coordinated sampling, where we have a global fully random hash function, and can access neighbors in order of their hash values, paying a constant for each accessed neighbor. For edge sampling and counting, our new lower bounds are in the most powerful full neighborhood access model. We provide matching upper bounds in the weaker hash-ordered neighbor access model. Our new faster algorithms can be provably implemented efficiently on massive graphs in external memory and with the current APIs for, e.g., Twitter or Wikipedia. For triangle counting, we provide a separation: a better upper bound with full neighborhood access than the known lower bounds with indexed neighbor access. The technical core of our paper is our edge-sampling algorithm on which the other results depend.

preprint2021arXiv

CountSketches, Feature Hashing and the Median of Three

In this paper, we revisit the classic CountSketch method, which is a sparse, random projection that transforms a (high-dimensional) Euclidean vector $v$ to a vector of dimension $(2t-1) s$, where $t, s > 0$ are integer parameters. It is known that even for $t=1$, a CountSketch allows estimating coordinates of $v$ with variance bounded by $\|v\|_2^2/s$. For $t > 1$, the estimator takes the median of $2t-1$ independent estimates, and the probability that the estimate is off by more than $2 \|v\|_2/\sqrt{s}$ is exponentially small in $t$. This suggests choosing $t$ to be logarithmic in a desired inverse failure probability. However, implementations of CountSketch often use a small, constant $t$. Previous work only predicts a constant factor improvement in this setting. Our main contribution is a new analysis of Count-Sketch, showing an improvement in variance to $O(\min\{\|v\|_1^2/s^2,\|v\|_2^2/s\})$ when $t > 1$. That is, the variance decreases proportionally to $s^{-2}$, asymptotically for large enough $s$. We also study the variance in the setting where an inner product is to be estimated from two CountSketches. This finding suggests that the Feature Hashing method, which is essentially identical to CountSketch but does not make use of the median estimator, can be made more reliable at a small cost in settings where using a median estimator is possible. We confirm our theoretical findings in experiments and thereby help justify why a small constant number of estimates often suffice in practice. Our improved variance bounds are based on new general theorems about the variance and higher moments of the median of i.i.d. random variables that may be of independent interest.

preprint2021arXiv

Performance of Bounded-Rational Agents With the Ability to Self-Modify

Self-modification of agents embedded in complex environments is hard to avoid, whether it happens via direct means (e.g. own code modification) or indirectly (e.g. influencing the operator, exploiting bugs or the environment). It has been argued that intelligent agents have an incentive to avoid modifying their utility function so that their future instances work towards the same goals. Everitt et al. (2016) formally show that providing an option to self-modify is harmless for perfectly rational agents. We show that this result is no longer true for agents with bounded rationality. In such agents, self-modification may cause exponential deterioration in performance and gradual misalignment of a previously aligned agent. We investigate how the size of this effect depends on the type and magnitude of imperfections in the agent's rationality (1-4 below). We also discuss model assumptions and the wider problem and framing space. We examine four ways in which an agent can be bounded-rational: it either (1) doesn't always choose the optimal action, (2) is not perfectly aligned with human values, (3) has an inaccurate model of the environment, or (4) uses the wrong temporal discounting factor. We show that while in the cases (2)-(4) the misalignment caused by the agent's imperfection does not increase over time, with (1) the misalignment may grow exponentially.