$30 off During Our Annual Pro Sale. View Details »

SAMSI-QMC WG 5-3 Research Problem Proposal & Preliminary Results

SAMSI-QMC WG 5-3 Research Problem Proposal & Preliminary Results

A concrete research problem proposed in the SAMSI Working Group Meeting, with appended results

Fred J. Hickernell

January 17, 2018
Tweet

More Decks by Fred J. Hickernell

Other Decks in Research

Transcript

  1. Research Problem Proposal:
    Function Approximation when Function Values Are Expensive
    Fred J. Hickernell
    Department of Applied Mathematics, Illinois Institute of Technology
    [email protected] mypages.iit.edu/~hickernell
    Supported by NSF-DMS-1522687
    Working Group V.3, January 17 & 31, 2018

    View Slide

  2. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Prologue
    May 7–9 we have our SAMSI-QMC Transitions Workshop where we should report on our
    progress.
    Now is the time for proposing and addressing concrete problems.
    These slides outline a specific problem that I will work on. I welcome collaborators.
    Please indicate your interest.
    If you have another specific problem to propose, that you are willing to lead please do so.
    If you just wish to observe and comment, you are welcome also.
    2/14

    View Slide

  3. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Notation and Assumptions
    Let F be a vector space of functions f : [0, 1]d → R that have L2[0, 1]d orthogonal series
    expansions:
    f(x) =
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)φj(x), φj(x) = φj1
    (x1) · · · φjd
    (xd) What is the right basis?
    Suppose that we may observe the Fourier coefficients f(j) at a cost of $1 each. (Eventually we
    want to consider the case of observing function values.) For any vector of non-negative
    constants, γ = (γj)j∈Nd
    0
    , define the inner product on F,
    f, g γ
    =
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)^
    g(j)γ−2
    j
    , 0/0 = 0, γj = 0, f γ
    < ∞ =⇒ f(j) = 0
    Order the elements of γ such that γj1
    γj2
    · · · . The best approximation to f given n
    Fourier coefficients chosen optimally is
    f(x) =
    n
    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    , f − f
    2
    =

    i=n+1
    f(ji)
    2
    γ−2
    ji
    · γ2
    ji
    γjn+1
    f γ
    3/14

    View Slide

  4. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Over-Arching Problem
    f(x) =
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)φj(x) =

    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    (x) dependence of f on d is hidden
    f(x) =
    n
    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    (x), f − f
    2
    =

    i=n+1
    f(ji)
    2
    γ−2
    ji
    · γ2
    ji
    γjn+1
    f γ
    Over-arching problem: Under what conditions on γ can we make γjn+1
    ε, and so
    f − f
    2
    ε f γ
    for n = O(d)?
    Novak, E. & Woźniakowski, H. Tractability of Multivariate Problems Volume I: Linear Information. EMS Tracts in
    Mathematics 6 (European Mathematical Society, Zürich, 2008), Kühn, T. et al. Approximation numbers of Sobolev
    embeddings—Sharp constants and tractability. J. Complexity 30, 95–116 (2014). 4/14

    View Slide

  5. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Over-Arching Problem
    f(x) =
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)φj(x) =

    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    (x) dependence of f on d is hidden
    f(x) =
    n
    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    (x), f − f
    2
    =

    i=n+1
    f(ji)
    2
    γ−2
    ji
    · γ2
    ji
    γjn+1
    f γ
    Trick: γjn+1
    1
    n
    γ1/p
    j1
    + · · · + γ1/p
    jn
    p 1
    np
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    p
    ∀p > 0
    n
    1
    ε1/p
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    =⇒ γjn+1
    ε =⇒ f − f
    2
    ε f γ
    so want
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    = O(d)
    5/14

    View Slide

  6. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    C = {f ∈ F : f
    γ
    < ∞} Where γ Is Known
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    = O(d) =⇒ f − f
    2
    ε f γ
    for n = O(d) ∀f ∈ C,
    p = order of convergence
    how the sum varies with d tells you whether you can afford the approximation
    Fail Case. γj = γj1
    · · · γjd
    , γ0 = 1
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    =



    j=0
    γ1/p
    j


    d
    exponential growth in d
    6/14

    View Slide

  7. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    C = {f ∈ F : f
    γ
    < ∞} Where γ Is Known
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    = O(d) =⇒ f − f
    2
    ε f γ
    for n = O(d) ∀f ∈ C
    Success Case. γj = γj1,1 · · · γjd,d
    , γj,k =



    1, j = 0
    1
    (kj)p(1+δ)
    , j > 0,
    δ > 0
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    =
    d
    k=1

    j=0
    γ1/p
    jk,k
    =
    d
    k=1

    1 +

    j=1
    1
    k1+δj1+δ

     = exp


    d
    k=1
    log

    1 +
    1
    k1+δ

    j=1
    1
    j1+δ




    exp


    d
    k=1
    1
    k1+δ

    j=1
    1
    j1+δ

     exp



    k=1
    1
    k1+δ

    j=1
    1
    j1+δ

     < ∞
    Power of k or j can be larger than the other, but it does not help
    7/14

    View Slide

  8. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    C = {f ∈ F : f
    γ
    < ∞} Where γ Is Known
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    = O(d) =⇒ f − f
    2
    ε f γ
    for n = O(d) ∀f ∈ C
    Success Case. γ0 = 1, γ(0,...,0,j,0,...0)
    = j−p(1+δ), and γj = 0 otherwise (additive functions)
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    =
    d
    k=1

    1 +

    j=1
    1
    j1+δ

     = d

    1 +

    j=1
    1
    j1+δ

     linear in d
    8/14

    View Slide

  9. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Open Questions
    The known results assume that some terms in the expansion are small and that you know
    which terms are small a priori: cone of successful functions is
    C = f ∈ F : f γ
    < ∞, sup
    d
    1
    d
    j∈Nd
    0
    γ1/p
    j
    where γ is fixed in advance
    Is it possible to have a cone of successful functions for which
    γ is not fixed in advance,
    γ is inferred by the observed f(ji), and
    n = O(d) obtains f − f
    2
    ε?
    9/14

    View Slide

  10. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Some Assumptions
    Experimental design assumes the following
    Effect sparsity: Only a small number of effects are important
    Effect hierarchy: Lower-order effects are more important than higher-order effects
    Effect heredity: Interaction is active only if both parent effects are also active
    Effect smoothness: Coarse horizontal scales are more important than fine horizontal scales
    These assumptions may suggest γ of product form:
    γj = γj1,1 · · · γjd,d, γj,k =



    1, j = 0,
    γ1,k
    jp
    , j > 0,
    γ1,k
    unknown, p known
    To infer the γ1,k
    , set
    γ1,1 = f(1, 0, . . . , 0)/f(0) , γ1,2 = f(0, 1, 0, . . . , 0)/f(0) , . . . , γ1,d = f(0, . . . , 0, 1)/f(0)
    Wu, C. F. J. & Hamada, M. Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Parameter Design Optimization. (John Wiley
    & Sons, Inc., New York, 2000). 10/14

    View Slide

  11. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Possible Algorithm
    If the Fourier coefficients are sampled in the order j1, j2, . . ., then
    f(x) =
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)φj(x) =

    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    (x), f(x) =
    n
    i=1
    f(ji)φji
    f − f
    2
    =

    i=n+1
    f(ji)
    2
    γ−2
    ji
    · γ2
    ji
    sup
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)
    γj

    i=n+1
    γ2
    ji
    = sup
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)
    γj
    inferred from
    what’s observed

    j∈Nd
    0
    γ2
    j

    n
    i=1
    γ2
    ji
    →0 as n→∞
    γj = γj1,1 · · · γjd,d, γj,k =



    1, j = 0,
    γ1,k
    jp
    , j > 0,

    j∈Nd
    0
    γ2
    j
    =
    d
    k=1
    [1 + ζ(2p)γ1,k], γ1,k
    unknown
    Set j1 = 0, j1 = (1, 0 . . . , 0), . . . , jd+1
    = (0, . . . , 0, 1), sample f(j1), . . . , f(jd+1
    ), and set
    γ1,1 = f(1, 0, . . . , 0)/f(0) , γ1,2 = f(0, 1, 0, . . . , 0)/f(0) , . . . , γ1,d = f(0, . . . , 0, 1)/f(0)
    Increment i, choose ji with the next largest γj, and sample f(ji), until error bound is small.
    11/14

    View Slide

  12. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    What Needs Attention
    Our cone of nice functions looks somewhat like
    C = f ∈ F : sup
    j∈Nd
    0
    f(j)
    γj
    < ∞, for some γ satisfying
    γj = γj1,1 · · · γjd,d, γj,k =



    1, j = 0,
    γ1,k
    jp
    , j > 0,
    d
    k=1
    [1 + ζ(2p)γ1,k] = O(d2)
    Bookkeeping on next largest γj
    Have trouble if f(0) is too small
    If f(j)/γj is observed to be too large, may need to increase γ1,k
    for some k or decrease p
    May want to infer p
    Might be able to do L∞ function approximation
    Need to move from observing Fourier coefficients to observing function values
    Try some examples
    12/14

    View Slide

  13. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Closing Thoughts
    May 7–9 we have our SAMSI-QMC Transitions Workshop where we should report on our
    progress.
    Now is the time for proposing and addressing concrete problems.
    These slides outline a specific problem that I will work on. I welcome collaborators.
    Please indicate your interest.
    If you have another specific problem to propose, that you are willing to lead please do so.
    If you just wish to observe and comment, you are welcome also.
    13/14

    View Slide

  14. Thank you
    These slides are at https://speakerdeck.com/fjhickernell/samsi-qmc-wg-5-3-
    research-problem-proposal

    View Slide

  15. Background Known Results Results Under Construction References
    Novak, E. & Woźniakowski, H. Tractability of Multivariate Problems Volume I: Linear
    Information. EMS Tracts in Mathematics 6 (European Mathematical Society, Zürich, 2008).
    Kühn, T., Sickel, W. & Ullrich, T. Approximation numbers of Sobolev embeddings—Sharp
    constants and tractability. J. Complexity 30, 95–116 (2014).
    Wu, C. F. J. & Hamada, M. Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Parameter Design
    Optimization. (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2000).
    14/14

    View Slide