Paper detail

Approximating $L_p$ unit balls via random sampling

Let $X$ be an isotropic random vector in $R^d$ that satisfies that for every $v \in S^{d-1}$, $\|<X,v>\|_{L_q} \leq L \|<X,v>\|_{L_p}$ for some $q \geq 2p$. We show that for $0<\varepsilon<1$, a set of $N = c(p,q,\varepsilon) d$ random points, selected independently according to $X$, can be used to construct a $1 \pm \varepsilon$ approximation of the $L_p$ unit ball endowed on $R^d$ by $X$. Moreover, $c(p,q,\varepsilon) \leq c^p \varepsilon^{-2}\log(2/\varepsilon)$; when $q=2p$ the approximation is achieved with probability at least $1-2\exp(-cN \varepsilon^2/\log^2(2/\varepsilon))$ and if $q$ is much larger than $p$---say, $q=4p$, the approximation is achieved with probability at least $1-2\exp(-cN \varepsilon^2)$. In particular, when $X$ is a log-concave random vector, this estimate improves the previous state-of-the-art---that $N=c^\prime(p,\varepsilon) d^{p/2}\log d$ random points are enough, and that the approximation is valid with constant probability.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.