Expander walk sampling: Difference between revisions

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
added information about pseudorandomness
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 22:11, 10 February 2025

In the mathematical discipline of graph theory, the expander walk sampling theorem intuitively states that sampling vertices in an expander graph by doing relatively short random walk can simulate sampling the vertices independently from a uniform distribution. The earliest version of this theorem is due to Template:Harvtxt, and the more general version is typically attributed to Template:Harvtxt.

Statement

Let G=(V,E) be an n-vertex expander graph with positively weighted edges, and let AV. Let P denote the stochastic matrix of the graph, and let λ2 be the second largest eigenvalue of P. Let y0,y1,,yk1 denote the vertices encountered in a (k1)-step random walk on G starting at vertex y0, and let π(A):= limk1ki=0k1𝟏A(yi). Where 𝟏A(y){1,if yA0,otherwise 

(It is well known[1] that almost all trajectories y0,y1,,yk1 converges to some limiting point, π(A), as k.)

The theorem states that for a weighted graph G=(V,E) and a random walk y0,y1,,yk1 where y0 is chosen by an initial distribution 𝐪, for all γ>0, we have the following bound:

Pr[|1ki=0k1𝟏A(yi)π(A)|γ]Ce120(γ2(1λ2)k).

Where C is dependent on 𝐪,G and A.

The theorem gives a bound for the rate of convergence to π(A) with respect to the length of the random walk, hence giving a more efficient method to estimate π(A) compared to independent sampling the vertices of G.

Proof

In order to prove the theorem, we provide a few definitions followed by three lemmas.

Let 𝑤𝑥𝑦 be the weight of the edge xyE(G) and let 𝑤𝑥=𝑦:𝑥𝑦𝐸(𝐺)𝑤𝑥𝑦. Denote by π(x):=𝑤𝑥/𝑦𝑉𝑤𝑦. Let 𝐪π be the matrix with entries𝐪(x)π(x) , and let Nπ,𝐪=||𝐪π||2.

Let D=diag(1/𝑤𝑖) and M=(𝑤𝑖𝑗). Let P(r)=PEr where P is the stochastic matrix, Er=diag(er𝟏A) and r0. Then:

P=DSD1andP(r)=DEr1S(r)ErD1

Where S:=DMD and S(r):=DErMDEr. As S and S(r) are symmetric, they have real eigenvalues. Therefore, as the eigenvalues of S(r) and P(r) are equal, the eigenvalues of P(r) are real. Let λ(r) and λ2(r) be the first and second largest eigenvalue of P(r) respectively.

For convenience of notation, let tk=1ki=0k1𝟏A(yi), ϵ=λλ2, ϵr=λ(r)λ2(r), and let 𝟏 be the all-1 vector.

Lemma 1

Pr[tkπ(A)γ]erk(π(A)+γ)+klogλ(r)(𝐪P(r)k𝟏)/λ(r)k

Proof:

By Markov's inequality,

Pr[tkπ(A)+γ]=Pr[ertkerk(π(A)+γ)]erk(π(A)+γ)E𝐪ertk

Where E𝐪 is the expectation of x0 chosen according to the probability distribution 𝐪. As this can be interpreted by summing over all possible trajectories x0,x1,...,xk, hence:

E𝐪ert=x1,x2,...,xkert𝕢(x0)Πi=1kpxi1xi=𝐪P(r)k𝟏

Combining the two results proves the lemma.

Lemma 2

For 0r1,

(𝐪P(r)k𝟏)/λ(r)k(1+r)Nπ,𝐪

Proof:

As eigenvalues of P(r) and S(r) are equal,

(𝐪P(r)k𝟏)/λ(r)k=(𝐪PDEr1S(r)kD1Er𝟏)/λ(r)ker/2||𝐪π||2||S(r)k||2||π||2/λ(r)ker/2Nπ,𝐪(1+r)Nπ,𝐪

Lemma 3

If r is a real number such that 0er1ϵ/4,

logλ(r)rπ(A)+5r2/ϵ

Proof summary:

We Taylor expand logλ(y) about point r=z to get:

logλ(r)=logλ(z)+mz(rz)+(rz)201(1t)Vz+(rz)tdt

Where mx and Vx are first and second derivatives of logλ(r) at r=x. We show that m0=limktk=π(A). We then prove that (i) ϵr3ϵ/4 by matrix manipulation, and then prove (ii)Vr10/ϵ using (i) and Cauchy's estimate from complex analysis.

The results combine to show that

logλ(r)=logλ(0)+m0r+r201(1t)Vrtdtrπ(A)+5r2/ϵ
A line to line proof can be found in Gilman (1998)[1]

Proof of theorem

Combining lemma 2 and lemma 3, we get that

Pr[tkπ(A)γ](1+r)Nπ,𝐪ek(rγ5r2/ϵ)

Interpreting the exponent on the right hand side of the inequality as a quadratic in r and minimising the expression, we see that

Pr[tkπ(A)γ](1+γϵ/10)Nπ,𝐪ekγ2ϵ/20

A similar bound

Pr[tkπ(A)γ](1+γϵ/10)Nπ,𝐪ekγ2ϵ/20

holds, hence setting C=2(1+γϵ/10)Nπ,𝐪 gives the desired result.

Uses

This theorem is useful in randomness reductions in the study of derandomization [2], showing that expander random walks are good pseudorandom generators against various classes of test functions. Sampling from an expander walk is an example of a randomness-efficient sampler. Note that the number of bits used in sampling k independent samples from f is klogn, whereas if we sample from an infinite family of constant-degree expanders this costs only logn+O(k). Such families exist and are efficiently constructible, e.g. the Ramanujan graphs of Lubotzky-Phillips-Sarnak.

References

Template:Reflist Template:Refbegin

Template:Refend