3.8 Proceedings Paper

On Projection Robust Optimal Transport: Sample Complexity and Model Misspecification

出版社

MICROTOME PUBLISHING

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DMS-1803241]
  2. Mathematical Data Science program of the Office of Naval Research [N00014-18-1-2764]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the statistical properties of projection robust OT, introduces the IPRW distance as an alternative to PRW, and shows that both PRW and IPRW distances outperform Wasserstein distances in high-dimensional inference tasks.
Optimal transport (OT) distances are increasingly used as loss functions for statistical inference, notably in the learning of generative models or supervised learning. Yet, the behavior of minimum Wasserstein estimators is poorly understood, notably in high-dimensional regimes or under model misspecification. In this work we adopt the viewpoint of projection robust (PR) OT, which seeks to maximize the OT cost between two measures by choosing a k-dimensional sub-space onto which they can be projected. Our first contribution is to establish several fundamental statistical properties of PRW asserstein distances, complementing and improving previous literature that has been restricted to one-dimensional and well-specified cases. Next, we propose the integral PR Wasserstein (IPRW) distance as an alternative to the PRW distance, by averaging rather than optimizing on subspaces. Our complexity bounds can help explain why both PRW and IPRW distances outperform Wasserstein distances empirically in high-dimensional inference tasks. Finally, we consider parametric inference using the PRW distance. We provide an asymptotic guarantee of two types of minimum PRW estimators and formulate a central limit theorem for max-sliced Wasserstein estimator under model misspecification. To enable our analysis on PRW with projection dimension larger than one, we devise a novel combination of variational analysis and statistical theory.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据