Algebraic

Geometric Methods for
Learning Gaussian Mixture Models
Mikhail
Belkin
Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering,
Dept. of Statistics
Ohio State
University / ISTA
Joint work with
Kaushik
Sinha
TexPoint fonts used in EMF.
Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.:
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
First considered by Pearson, 1894.
Analyzed 1000 crabs from Naples.
Concluded
(erroneously?) that
there were two distinct populations.
From crabs to Gaussians
The Problem
Learning Gaussian Mixture Model
•
Classical problem in statistics
–
goes back to the classical work of Pearson(1894) .
•
Widely used model for scientific/engineering tasks
•
Application areas include
–
Speech Recognition
–
Computer Vision
–
Bioinformatics
–
Astronomy
–
Medicine
–
…..
Gaussian Mixtures
Problem:
identifying parameters of a Gaussian mixture distribution from a finite
sample.
The Problem
The Problem
The Problem
•
Mixture of Gaussians in
•
What does learning such a mixture mean?
–
estimating the parameters of a mixture within pre

specified accuracy from a
sample.
–
parameters are the means, covariance matrices and mixing weights of
component Gaussian distributions.
–
number of parameters:
Most popular method: Expectation Maximization
EM is by far the most popular method for mixture fitting.
Iterative procedure to find parameters (similar to
k

means
clustering).
Simple to implement.
Guaranteed to converge.
Converges to true values, if initialized close to true values.
However:
Sensitive to initialization. Numerous local maxima.
Does not detect the number of components.
Expectation Maximization
How EM fails: a simple example
From Tao, Belkin, Yu, Annals of Statistics, 2010
The Problem
Some Recent Progress
•
Understanding computational aspects of Gaussian Mixture
Learning
–
is it possible to learn Gaussian mixture in time and using a sample of size
polynomial in dimension?
•
Dasgupta
(1999) showed that learning a mixture of Gaussians
in using a sample size polynomial in n is possible.
–
result was surprising because complexity of many problems scales
exponentially with dimension (curse of dimensionality).
Something as simple
as the volume of a convex
body cannot be estimated
using number of samples
polynomial in dimension
(Barany,
Furedi
, 88).
Learning in high dimension
Dasgupta’s Result, 1999
•
It is possible to learn mixture of Gaussians in using a
sample size polynomial in , if the component separation is rof
the order
–
component separation is the minimum distance between the component
means.
Partial Summary of Results on Gaussian Mixture Learning
•
Min. separation is independent of and
•
Our Result (solves the general problem)
Summary of Existing Results
Author
Min. Separation
Description
[
Dasgupta
], 1999
Gaussian
mixtures, mild assumptions
[
Dasgupta

Schulman], 2000
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Arora

Kannan
], 2001
Gaussian
mixtures
[
Vempala

Wang], 2002
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kannan

Salmasian

Vempala
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures,
Logconcave
Distr.
[
Achlioptas

McSherry
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures
Partial Summary of Results on Gaussian Mixture Learning
•
Min. separation is independent of and
•
Our Result (solves the general problem)
Summary of Existing Results
Author
Min. Separation
Description
[
Dasgupta
], 1999
Gaussian
mixtures, mild assumptions
[
Dasgupta

Schulman], 2000
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Arora

Kannan
], 2001
Gaussian
mixtures
[
Vempala

Wang], 2002
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kannan

Salmasian

Vempala
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures,
Logconcave
Distr.
[
Achlioptas

McSherry
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures
Min. separation is an
increasing function of
and/
orr
Partial Summary of Results on Gaussian Mixture Learning
•
Min. separation is independent of and
•
Our Result (solves the general problem)
Summary of Existing Results
Author
Min. Separation
Description
[
Dasgupta
], 1999
Gaussian
mixtures, mild assumptions
[
Dasgupta

Schulman], 2000
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Arora

Kannan
], 2001
Gaussian
mixtures
[
Vempala

Wang], 2002
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kannan

Salmasian

Vempala
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures,
Logconcave
Distr.
[
Achlioptas

McSherry
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures
[
Belkin

Sinha
], 2009
Identical
s
pherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kalai

Moitra

Valiant], 2010
Gaussian
mixtures with 2 components
Min. separation is an
increasing function of
and/
orr
[Feldman

O’Donnell

Servedio
], 2006
Axis
aligned
Gaussian
s,
no
param
. est.
Partial Summary of Results on Gaussian Mixture Learning
•
Min. separation is independent of and
•
Our Result (
solves the general problem
)
Summary of Existing Results
Author
Min. Separation
Description
[
Dasgupta
], 1999
Gaussian
mixtures, mild assumptions
[
Dasgupta

Schulman], 2000
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Arora

Kannan
], 2001
Gaussian
mixtures
[
Vempala

Wang], 2002
Spherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kannan

Salmasian

Vempala
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures,
Logconcave
Distr.
[
Achlioptas

McSherry
], 2005
Gaussian
Mixtures
[
Belkin

Sinha
], 2009
Identical
s
pherical Gaussian
mixtures
[
Kalai

Moitra

Valiant], 2010
Gaussian
mixtures with 2 components
[Belkin

Sinha], 2010
Gaussian mixtures
Min. separation is an
increasing function of
and/
orr
[Feldman

O’Donnell

Servedio
], 2006
Axis
aligned
Gaussian
s,
no
param
. est.
[Moitra

Valiant], 2010
Gaussian mixtures
Identifiabilty
•
Different values of parameters
could give rise to same
distribution
•
N
eed
for a quantification of how
hard it is to learn the parameters
from data
Obstacle in Learning
Example:
parameters of the following
distribution family cannot be learned
from sampled data
Identifiabilty
•
Different values of parameters
could give rise to same
distribution
•
N
eed
for a quantification of how
hard it is to statistically learn the
parameters from data
Obstacle in Learning
Example:
parameters of the following
distribution family cannot be learned
from sampled data
Identifiabilty
•
Different values of parameters
could give rise to same
distribution
•
N
eed
for a quantification of how
hard it is to statistically learn the
parameters from data
Obstacle in Learning
If and are close to two values of parameters
and with identical probability distributions , then
it is hard to distinguish them from sampled data,
even when is large.
Example:
parameters of the following
distribution family cannot be learned
from sampled data
Example:
Radius of Identifiability
•
Introduce Radius of Identifiability
–
it is the radius of largest open ball
around such that any two different
parameters from this ball give rise to
different probability density functions.
–
if no such ball exists, i.e., , then
parameters cannot be identified
uniquely, given any amount of data.
–
complexity scales with
Radius of Identifiability
Radius of Identifiability
•
Introduce Radius of Identifiability
–
it is the radius of largest open ball
around such that any two different
parameters from this ball give rise to
different probability density functions.
–
if no such ball exists, i.e., , then
parameters can not be identified
uniquely, given any amount of data.
–
complexity scales with
Radius of Identifiability
We show that explicit formula of for Gaussian mixture is
Our Result
Main Result
•
We show that the parameters of a Gaussian mixture with radius
of identifiability in can be learned (up to permutation) within
pre

specified precision with confidence using a sample
size , where is radius of the bounding
ball.
–
minimum separation can even be zero, i.e., two Gaussian components can
have same means but different covariance matrices.
–
polynomial dependence on is necessary.
Overview of Our Proof
1.
Reduction to fixed dimension
–
we show that learning Gaussian mixture in dimensions can be reduced to
, parameter estimation problems in dimensions. (more on this
later)
2.
Learning in fixed dimension
–
we introduce the general notion of “polynomial family” (more on this soon).
–
we show that the parameters of polynomial families can be learned within
accuracy with confidence at least , using a sample of size polynomial in
dd and .
–
in addition to Gaussian distribution, almost all standard parametric probability
distributions as well as their mixtures and products form polynomial families
(more on this soon).
Overview of Our Proof
Overview of Our Proof
1.
Reduction to fixed dimension
–
we show that learning Gaussian mixture in dimensions can be reduced to
,
parameter estimation problems in dimensions
(more on this
later).
2.
Learning in fixed dimension
–
we introduce the general notion of “polynomial family” (more on this soon).
–
we show that the parameters of polynomial families can be learned within
accuracy with confidence at least , using a sample of size polynomial in
dd and .
–
in addition to Gaussian distribution, almost all standard parametric probability
distributions as well as their mixtures and products form polynomial families
(more on this soon).
Overview of Our Proof
Overview of Our Proof
1.
Reduction to fixed dimension
–
we show that learning Gaussian mixture in dimensions can be reduced to
,
parameter estimation problems in dimensions
(more on this
later).
2.
Learning in fixed dimension
–
we introduce the general notion of
“polynomial family”
(more on this soon).
–
we show that the parameters of polynomial families can be learned within
accuracy with confidence at least , using a sample of size polynomial in
dd
and .
–
in addition to Gaussian distribution, almost all standard parametric probability
distributions as well as their
mixtures
and
products
form polynomial families
(more on this soon).
Overview of Our Proof
Learning in Fixed Dimension: Polynomial Family
•
Definition
–
a family of probability distributions parameterized by , forms a polynomial
family,
if each (raw) moment of exists and can be represented as a
polynomial of the parameters
.
Polynomial Family
Examples of Polynomial Families
Polynomial Family
Gaussian
Moments are given by
Hermite Polynomials
Examples of Polynomial Families
Polynomial Family
Gaussian
Gamma
Binomial
Exponentia
l
Examples include almost all standard parametric families as well as their
mixtures
and
products
. Hence Gaussian mixtures are also a polynomial family.
Moments are given by
Hermite Polynomials
Proof Sketch For Learning in Fixed Dimension
•
Main result for polynomial families
–
there is an algorithm which given for an identifiable family , where is
the set of parameters within a ball of radius , outputs within of
with probability at least , using a number of sample points from polynomial
in and .
•
Proof Sketch
1.
given a polynomial family, find a finite set of moments that completely
characterizes a distribution (
identifiability
).
2.
reformulate the problem of learning the parameters in terms of this set of
moments using algebraic inequalities.
3.
reduce the problem of learning the parameters to 1 dimension, using
techniques from algebraic geometry,
specifically,Tarski

Seidenberg theorem
(
elimination of quantifiers
).
Polynomial Family
Identifiability and Finite Set of Moments
•
Identifiability
–
family is identifiable if for any .
•
We will prove that when is identifiable, finite number of moments
are sufficient to uniquely identify the parameter
(next slide)
•
R
e
quires application of Hilbert Basis Theorem
Polynomial Family
Hilbert Basis Theorem :
Every ideal in a ring of polynomials is finitely generated
.
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
Finite Set of Moments Fully Characterizes Polynomial
Family
•
For a polynomial family each moment is a polynomial of .
•
Let be a polynomial of variables.
•
Let be the ideal in the ring of polynomials of variables generated by
polynomials .
•
Let , where is an increasing sequence.
•
Hilbert Basis theorem ensures that is finitely generated hence there exists some
large enough such that for any
•
Identifiability implies first moments defines the distribution uniquely.
Polynomial Family
What Next?
•
If the first moments are known precisely then the problem of learning
the parameters is almost solved
–
only remaining task is to solve a finite set of polynomial equations.
–
can be done algorithmically.
•
However, moments need to be estimated from sample data
–
uncertainty in moment estimation introduces uncertainty in parameter estimation.
–
how do we deal with it?
•
A powerful result from mathematics, called the
Tarski

Seidenberg
Theorem
helps us to prove that
–
moment estimation error depends only
polynomially
on parameter estimation error.
Polynomial Family
Tarski

Seidenberg Theorem
Polynomial Family
•
Semi

algebraic Set
–
a semi algebraic set in is a finite union of sets defined by a finite number of
polynomial equations and inequalities.
•
Tarski

Seidenberg Theorem
–
Let be a projection map. If is a semi

algebraic set in for some
ok
, then is a semi

algebraic set in .
–
this is equivalent to elimination of quantifiers for semi

algebraic sets.
Equivalent to elimination of
existential quantifier
Characterization of Uncertainty
Polynomial Family
•
Suppose first moments completely characterizes the
distribution
–
for any two parameters , define .
–
,
iff
.
•
Fix and consider the set
–
since logical statements can be expressed as algebraic conditions by
Tarski

Seidenberg Theorem is a semi

algebraic subset of .
–
eliminating the quantifiers reduces the problem to 1

dimension, where it can be
shown that is
polynomially
dependent on
supremum
of .
Characterization of Uncertainty
Polynomial Family
•
Suppose first moments completely characterizes the
distribution
–
for any two parameters , define .
–
,
iff
.
•
Fix and consider the set
–
since logical statements can be expressed as algebraic conditions by
Tarski

Seidenberg Theorem is a semi

algebraic subset of .
–
eliminating the quantifiers reduces the problem to 1

dimension, where it can be
shown that is
polynomially
dependent on
supremum
of .
Characterization of Uncertainty
Polynomial Family
•
Suppose first moments completely characterizes the
distribution
–
for any two parameters , define .
–
,
iff
.
•
Fix and consider the set
–
here can be viewed as an around taking probability distribution
into account.
–
since logical statements can be expressed as algebraic conditions by
Tarski

Seidenberg Theorem is a semi

algebraic subset of .
–
eliminating the quantifiers reduces the problem to 1

dimension, where it can be
shown that is
polynomialy
dependent on .
here can be viewed as an
around taking probability distribution into
account.
A Simple Example
•
Consider a univariate Gaussian with zero mean
–
second moment uniquely defines this distribution.
•
For any two , assume and consider the following set
–
by Tarski

Seideberg Theorem is a semi algebraic subset of and in this case we
can see what it is exactly (
geometric interpretation on next slide).
•
For a fixed , supremum of represents allowable parameter estimation
error for a fixed moment estimation error
–
elimination of and leads to a relation between and .
Polynomial Family
Reduction to Fixed Dimension
•
Results of learning polynomial families for a fixed dimension can
not be applied directly to mixture of high

dimensional Gaussians
–
number of parameters to be estimated
increases with dimension.
–
how do we deal with it?
•
We show that it is possible to estimate the parameters in high
dimension by solving parameter estimation problems in
appropriate low dimensions
–
why does it work?
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Good News
–
projecting a Gaussian mixture onto a lower dimensional coordinate plane yields a
low

dimensional Gaussian mixture where,
•
mixing coefficients remain the same
•
new component means are the projections of the original component means,
•
new component covariance matrices are the restrictions of the original component
covariance matrices.
–
results for polynomial families can be used to learn the parameters of this low

dimensional Gaussian mixture.
–
hopefully, parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture can be learned by
learning the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected gaussian mixture may become zero (not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be uniquely learned from
the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussain mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Good News
–
projecting a Gaussian mixture onto a lower dimensional coordinate plane yields a
low

dimensional Gaussian mixture where,
•
mixing coefficients remain the same.
•
new component means are the projections of the original component means.
•
new component covariance matrices are the restrictions of the original component
covariance matrices.
–
results for polynomial families can be used to learn the parameters of this low

dimensional Gaussian mixture.
–
hopefully, parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture can be learned by
learning the parameters of
several
low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be uniquely learned from
the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussain mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Good News
–
projecting a Gaussian mixture onto a lower dimensional coordinate plane yields a
low

dimensional Gaussian mixture where,
•
mixing coefficients remain the same.
•
new component means are the projections of the original component means.
•
new component covariance matrices are the restrictions of the original component
covariance matrices.
–
results for polynomial families can be used to learn the parameters of this low

dimensional Gaussian mixture.
–
hopefully, parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture can be learned by
learning the parameters of
several
low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (
not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be
uniquely
learned
from the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (
not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be
uniquely
learned
from the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (
not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be
uniquely
learned
from the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (
not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be
uniquely
learned
from the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
Low

dimensional Projection of Gaussian Mixture
•
Some Difficulties
–
radius of identifiability of the projected Gaussian mixture may become zero (
not
learnable!).
–
parameters of high dimensional Gaussian mixture may not be
uniquely
learned
from the parameters of several low

dimensional Gaussian mixtures.
Reduction
?
Sketch of the algorithm
•
Step 1
–
identify a low

dimensional (fixed) coordinate plane where radius of identifiability
reduces only by a fixed amount.
•
this can be done deterministically by checking at most number of coordinate
planes.
–
project high dimensional Gaussian mixture onto this coordinate plane and learn the
parameters of this low

dimensional Gaussian mixture.
•
using results of learning polynomial families in a fixed dimension.
•
Step 2
–
parameters along each remaining coordinate can be estimated separately by
adding each coordinate at a time and aligning the estimates obtained from two
parameter estimation problems in overlapping fixed dimensions.
•
total number of such low

dimensional parameter estimation problems is at most .
Reduction
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction sketch
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Reduction
Sketch of the idea: two components in three dimensions.
Conclusion
•
Resolve the general problem of polynomial learning of Gaussian
mixture distribution.
–
Completes an active line of research in theoretical computer science.
•
The proof brings together the techniques of algebraic geometry and
the classical method of moments.
•
A step toward understanding algorithmic issues of Gaussian mixture
modelling.
Conclusion
Comments 0
Log in to post a comment