##### A PTAS for $\ell_p$-Low Rank Approximation
A number of recent works have studied algorithms for entrywise $\ell_p$-low rank approximation, namely algorithms which given an $n \times d$ matrix $A$ (with $n \geq d$), output a rank-$k$ matrix $B$ minimizing $\|A-B\|_p^p=\sum_{i,j} |A_{i,j} - B_{i,j}|^p$. We show the following: On the algorithmic side, for $p \in (0,2)$, we give the first $n^{\text{poly}(k/\epsilon)}$ time $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm. For $p = 0$, there are various problem formulations, a common one being the binary setting for which $A\in\{0,1\}^{n\times d}$ and $B = U \cdot V$, where $U\in\{0,1\}^{n \times k}$ and $V\in\{0,1\}^{k \times d}$. There are also various notions of multiplication $U \cdot V$, such as a matrix product over the reals, over a finite field, or over a Boolean semiring. We give the first PTAS for what we call the Generalized Binary $\ell_0$-Rank-$k$ Approximation problem, for which these variants are special cases. Our algorithm runs in time $(1/\epsilon)^{2^{O(k)}/\epsilon^{2}} \cdot nd \cdot \log^{2^k} d$. For the specific case of finite fields of constant size, we obtain an alternate algorithm with time $n \cdot d^{\text{poly}(k/\epsilon)}$. On the hardness front, for $p \in (1,2)$, we show under the Small Set Expansion Hypothesis and Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH), there is no constant factor approximation algorithm running in time $2^{k^{\delta}}$ for a constant $\delta > 0$, showing an exponential dependence on $k$ is necessary. For $p = 0$, we observe that there is no approximation algorithm for the Generalized Binary $\ell_0$-Rank-$k$ Approximation problem running in time $2^{2^{\delta k}}$ for a constant $\delta > 0$. We also show for finite fields of constant size, under the ETH, that any fixed constant factor approximation algorithm requires $2^{k^{\delta}}$ time for a constant $\delta > 0$.
###### NurtureToken New!

Token crowdsale for this paper ends in

###### Authors

Are you an author of this paper? Check the Twitter handle we have for you is correct.

###### Subcategories

#1. Which part of the paper did you read?

#2. The paper contains new data or analyses that is openly accessible?
#3. The conclusion is supported by the data and analyses?
#4. The conclusion is of scientific interest?
#5. The result is likely to lead to future research?

User:
Repo:
Stargazers:
0
Forks:
0
Open Issues:
0
Network:
0
Subscribers:
0
Language:
None
Views:
0
Likes:
0
Dislikes:
0
Favorites:
0
0
###### Other
Sample Sizes (N=):
Inserted:
Words Total:
Words Unique:
Source:
Abstract:
None
07/17/18 09:09PM
36,364
5,031