Paper detail

Adaptivity and Computation-Statistics Tradeoffs for Kernel and Distance based High Dimensional Two Sample Testing

Nonparametric two sample testing is a decision theoretic problem that involves identifying differences between two random variables without making parametric assumptions about their underlying distributions. We refer to the most common settings as mean difference alternatives (MDA), for testing differences only in first moments, and general difference alternatives (GDA), which is about testing for any difference in distributions. A large number of test statistics have been proposed for both these settings. This paper connects three classes of statistics - high dimensional variants of Hotelling's t-test, statistics based on Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces, and energy statistics based on pairwise distances. We ask the question: how much statistical power do popular kernel and distance based tests for GDA have when the unknown distributions differ in their means, compared to specialized tests for MDA? We formally characterize the power of popular tests for GDA like the Maximum Mean Discrepancy with the Gaussian kernel (gMMD) and bandwidth-dependent variants of the Energy Distance with the Euclidean norm (eED) in the high-dimensional MDA regime. Some practically important properties include (a) eED and gMMD have asymptotically equal power; furthermore they enjoy a free lunch because, while they are additionally consistent for GDA, they also have the same power as specialized high-dimensional t-test variants for MDA. All these tests are asymptotically optimal (including matching constants) under MDA for spherical covariances, according to simple lower bounds, (b) The power of gMMD is independent of the kernel bandwidth, as long as it is larger than the choice made by the median heuristic, (c) There is a clear and smooth computation-statistics tradeoff for linear-time, subquadratic-time and quadratic-time versions of these tests, with more computation resulting in higher power.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors6 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.