Skip to main content
Log in

Improved Bounds on Sample Size for Implicit Matrix Trace Estimators

  • Published:
Foundations of Computational Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article is concerned with Monte Carlo methods for the estimation of the trace of an implicitly given matrix \(A\) whose information is only available through matrix-vector products. Such a method approximates the trace by an average of \(N\) expressions of the form \( \mathbf{w} ^t (A \mathbf{w} )\), with random vectors \( \mathbf{w} \) drawn from an appropriate distribution. We prove, discuss and experiment with bounds on the number of realizations \(N\) required to guarantee a probabilistic bound on the relative error of the trace estimation upon employing Rademacher (Hutchinson), Gaussian and uniform unit vector (with and without replacement) probability distributions. In total, one necessary bound and six sufficient bounds are proved, improving upon and extending similar estimates obtained in the seminal work of Avron and Toledo (JACM 58(2). Article 8, 2011) in several dimensions. We first improve their bound on \(N\) for the Hutchinson method, dropping a term that relates to \(\mathrm{rank}(A)\) and making the bound comparable with that for the Gaussian estimator. We further prove new sufficient bounds for the Hutchinson, Gaussian and unit vector estimators, as well as a necessary bound for the Gaussian estimator, which depend more specifically on properties of matrix \(A\). As such, they may suggest the type of matrix for which one distribution or another provides a particularly effective or relatively ineffective stochastic estimation method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Abramowitz. Handbook of Mathematical Functions, with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables. Dover, 1974.

  2. D. Achlioptas. Database-friendly random projections. In ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 01, volume 20, pages 274–281, 2001.

  3. H. Avron. Counting triangles in large graphs using randomized matrix trace estimation. Workshop on Large-scale Data Mining: Theory and Applications, 2010.

  4. H. Avron and S. Toledo. Randomized algorithms for estimating the trace of an implicit symmetric positive semi-definite matrix. JACM, 58(2), 2011. Article 8.

  5. Z. Bai, M. Fahey, and G. Golub. Some large scale matrix computation problems. J. Comput. Appl. Math., 74:71–89, 1996.

  6. C. Bekas, E. Kokiopoulou, and Y. Saad. An estimator for the diagonal of a matrix. Appl. Numer. Math., 57:12141229, 2007.

  7. K. van den Doel and U. Ascher. Adaptive and stochastic algorithms for EIT and DC resistivity problems with piecewise constant solutions and many measurements. SIAM J. Scient. Comput., 34: doi:10.1137/110826692, 2012.

  8. G. H. Golub, M. Heath, and G. Wahba. Generalized cross validation as a method for choosing a good ridge parameter. Technometrics, 21:215–223, 1979.

  9. E. Haber, M. Chung, and F. Herrmann. An effective method for parameter estimation with PDE constraints with multiple right-hand sides. SIAM J. Optimization, 22:739–757, 2012.

  10. M. F. Hutchinson. A stochastic estimator of the trace of the influence matrix for laplacian smoothing splines. J. Comm. Stat. Simul., 19:433–450, 1990.

  11. T. Van Leeuwen, S. Aravkin, and F. Herrmann. Seismic waveform inversion by stochastic optimization. Hindawi Intl. J. Geophysics, 2011: doi:10.1155/2011/689041, 2012.

  12. A. Mood, F. A. Graybill, and D. C. Boes. Introduction to the Theory of Statistics. McGraw-Hill; 3rdedition, 1974.

  13. F. Roosta-Khorasani, K. van den Doel, and U. Ascher. Stochastic algorithms for inverse problems involving PDEs and many measurements. SIAM J. Scient. Comput., 2014. To appear.

  14. R. J. Serfling. Probability inequalities for the sum in sampling without replacement. Annals of Statistics, 2:39–48, 1974.

  15. A. Shapiro, D. Dentcheva, and D. Ruszczynski. Lectures on Stochastic Programming: Modeling and Theory. Philadelphia: SIAM, 2009.

  16. G. J. Székely and N. K. Bakirov. Extremal probabilities for Gaussian quadratic forms. Probab. Theory Related Fields, 126:184–202, 2003.

  17. J. Tropp. Column subset selection, matrix factorization, and eigenvalue optimization. SODA, pages 978–986, 2009. SIAM.

  18. J. Young and D. Ridzal. An application of random projection to parameter estimation in partial differential equations. SIAM J. Scient. Comput., 34:A2344–A2365, 2012.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank our three anonymous referees for several valuable comments, which helped improve the text. Part of this work was completed while the second author was visiting the Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada (IMPA), Rio de Janeiro, supported by a Brazilian Science Without Borders grant and hosted by Prof. J. Zubelli. Thank you all.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Farbod Roosta-Khorasani.

Additional information

Communicated by Emmanuel Candès.

This work was supported in part by NSERC Discovery Grant 84306.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roosta-Khorasani, F., Ascher, U. Improved Bounds on Sample Size for Implicit Matrix Trace Estimators. Found Comput Math 15, 1187–1212 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-014-9220-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-014-9220-1

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation