This lecture will review everything you learned in Basic tools in probability

Similar documents
Lecture 4: Two-point Sampling, Coupon Collector s problem

Game Theory: Lecture #5

Lecture 5: The Principle of Deferred Decisions. Chernoff Bounds

1 Definitions and Things You Know

The key is that there are two disjoint populations, and everyone in the market is on either one side or the other

We set up the basic model of two-sided, one-to-one matching

With high probability

Tail Inequalities. The Chernoff bound works for random variables that are a sum of indicator variables with the same distribution (Bernoulli trials).

Expectation is linear. So far we saw that E(X + Y ) = E(X) + E(Y ). Let α R. Then,

Essentials on the Analysis of Randomized Algorithms

6.1 Occupancy Problem

The Fitness Level Method with Tail Bounds

Note that we are looking at the true mean, μ, not y. The problem for us is that we need to find the endpoints of our interval (a, b).

PROBLEMS OF MARRIAGE Eugene Mukhin

CMPUT 675: Approximation Algorithms Fall 2014

Econ 172A, Fall 2012: Final Examination Solutions (I) 1. The entries in the table below describe the costs associated with an assignment

Discrete Mathematics for CS Spring 2007 Luca Trevisan Lecture 20

An analogy from Calculus: limits

Random Variable. Pr(X = a) = Pr(s)

X = X X n, + X 2

Econ 172A, Fall 2012: Final Examination Solutions (II) 1. The entries in the table below describe the costs associated with an assignment

Homework 9 (due November 24, 2009)

U.C. Berkeley CS278: Computational Complexity Professor Luca Trevisan 1/29/2002. Notes for Lecture 3

One sided tests. An example of a two sided alternative is what we ve been using for our two sample tests:

Confidence Intervals. - simply, an interval for which we have a certain confidence.

Lecture 5: Two-point Sampling

What if There Were No Law of Large Numbers?

Randomized algorithm

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2014 Anant Sahai Midterm 1

Matching Theory and the Allocation of Kidney Transplantations

Twelfth Problem Assignment

Lecture 7: February 6

What do you do when you can t use money to solve your problems?

We're in interested in Pr{three sixes when throwing a single dice 8 times}. => Y has a binomial distribution, or in official notation, Y ~ BIN(n,p).

MS-A0504 First course in probability and statistics

CSE 21 Practice Exam for Midterm 2 Fall 2017

11.1 Set Cover ILP formulation of set cover Deterministic rounding

Theorem (Special Case of Ramsey s Theorem) R(k, l) is finite. Furthermore, it satisfies,

CS280, Spring 2004: Final

Lecture 4. P r[x > ce[x]] 1/c. = ap r[x = a] + a>ce[x] P r[x = a]

CSE 525 Randomized Algorithms & Probabilistic Analysis Spring Lecture 3: April 9

Introduction to Algorithms / Algorithms I Lecturer: Michael Dinitz Topic: Intro to Learning Theory Date: 12/8/16

STEP Support Programme. Statistics STEP Questions: Solutions

The first bound is the strongest, the other two bounds are often easier to state and compute. Proof: Applying Markov's inequality, for any >0 we have

HW2 Solutions, for MATH441, STAT461, STAT561, due September 9th

Homework 4 Solutions

In a five-minute period, you get a certain number m of requests. Each needs to be served from one of your n servers.

Two-Sided Matching. Terence Johnson. December 1, University of Notre Dame. Terence Johnson (ND) Two-Sided Matching December 1, / 47

How to Treat Evolutionary Algorithms as Ordinary Randomized Algorithms

Chapter 5 Least Squares Regression

Topic 3 Random variables, expectation, and variance, II

5.2 Infinite Series Brian E. Veitch

Matching. Terence Johnson. April 17, University of Notre Dame. Terence Johnson (ND) Matching April 17, / 41

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Summer 2014 James Cook Final Exam

Introduction to discrete probability. The rules Sample space (finite except for one example)

CS 473: Algorithms. Ruta Mehta. Spring University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Ruta (UIUC) CS473 1 Spring / 32

Assignment 3 Logic and Reasoning KEY

1 Review of The Learning Setting

Notes on Discrete Probability

Linear Equations and Functions

The Probabilistic Method

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2014 Anant Sahai Homework 3. This homework is due September 22, 2014, at 12:00 noon.

xy xyy 1 = ey 1 = y 1 i.e.

EECS 495: Randomized Algorithms Lecture 14 Random Walks. j p ij = 1. Pr[X t+1 = j X 0 = i 0,..., X t 1 = i t 1, X t = i] = Pr[X t+

Omega notation. Transitivity etc.

Ma/CS 6b Class 3: Stable Matchings

CHAPTER 3 : A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO DECISION MAKING

N/4 + N/2 + N = 2N 2.

Data Analysis and Monte Carlo Methods

Consider a complete bipartite graph with sets A and B, each with n vertices.

Decision Theory: Q-Learning

Intro to Stats Lecture 11

Sets. Review of basic probability. Tuples. E = {all even integers} S = {x E : x is a multiple of 3} CSE 101. I = [0, 1] = {x : 0 x 1}

Assignment 16 Assigned Weds Oct 11

Common Discrete Distributions

Lectures 6: Degree Distributions and Concentration Inequalities

GOV 2001/ 1002/ Stat E-200 Section 1 Probability Review

PAC Learning. prof. dr Arno Siebes. Algorithmic Data Analysis Group Department of Information and Computing Sciences Universiteit Utrecht

Lecture 4: Sampling, Tail Inequalities

Lecture 5. 1 Review (Pairwise Independence and Derandomization)

Note that we are looking at the true mean, μ, not y. The problem for us is that we need to find the endpoints of our interval (a, b).

Math 140 Introductory Statistics

CIVL Why are we studying probability and statistics? Learning Objectives. Basic Laws and Axioms of Probability

Lecture 13 (Part 2): Deviation from mean: Markov s inequality, variance and its properties, Chebyshev s inequality

variance of independent variables: sum of variances So chebyshev predicts won t stray beyond stdev.

Lecture Notes 12 Advanced Topics Econ 20150, Principles of Statistics Kevin R Foster, CCNY Spring 2012

Econ 172A, Fall 2012: Final Examination (I) 1. The examination has seven questions. Answer them all.

Computational Learning Theory

Aditya Bhaskara CS 5968/6968, Lecture 1: Introduction and Review 12 January 2016

Ma/CS 6b Class 3: Stable Matchings

Stable Matching Existence, Computation, Convergence Correlated Preferences. Stable Matching. Algorithmic Game Theory.

Business Statistics. Lecture 10: Course Review

1 Randomized Computation

STAT 414: Introduction to Probability Theory

CS261: A Second Course in Algorithms Lecture #18: Five Essential Tools for the Analysis of Randomized Algorithms

Stat 20 Midterm 1 Review

Matching Problems. Roberto Lucchetti. Politecnico di Milano

Notes on Simplex Algorithm

Hypothesis tests

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Spring 2014 Anant Sahai Note 18

Transcription:

Intro This lecture will review everything you learned in 6.042. Basic tools in probability Expectations High probability events Deviations from expectation Coupon collecting. n coupon types. Get a random one each round. How long to get all coupons? general example of waiting for combinations of events to happen. expected case analysis: after get coupons, each sample has 1 /n chance for new coupon so wait for ( + 1) st coupon has geometric distribution. expected value of geo dist w/param p is 1/p so get harmonic sum what standard tools did we use? using conditional expectation to study on phase; used linearity of expectation to add expected time for all coupons: n ln n + O(n). Stable Marriage Problem: complete preference lists stable if no two unmarried (to each other) people prefer each other. med school always exists. 1

Proof by proposal algorithm: ran men arbitrarily lowest unmarried man proposes in order of preference woman accepts if unmarried or prefers new proposal to current mate. Time Analysis: woman s state only improves with time only n improvements per woman while unattached man, proposals continue (some woman available, since every woman he proposed to is married now) must eventually all be attached Stability Analysis suppose X-y are dissatisfied with pairing X-x, Y -y. X proposed to y first y prefers current Y to X. Average case analysis nonstandard for our course random preference lists how many proposals? principle of deferred decisions used intuitively already random choices all made in advance same as random choices made when algorithm needs them. use for discussing autopartition, quicsort 2

Proposal algorithm: defered decision: each proposal is random among unchosen women still hard Each proposal among all women stochastic domination: X s.d. Y when Pr[X > z] Pr[Y > z] for all z. Result: E[X] E[Y ]. done when all women get a proposal. at each step 1/n chance women gts proposal This is just coupon collection: O(n log n) Deviations from Expectation Sometimes expectation isn t enough. Want to study deviations probability and magnitude of deviation from expectation. Example: balls in bins: n balls in n bins Expected balls per bin: 1 (not very interesting) What is max balls we expect to see in a bin? Start by bounding probability of many balls ( ) n Pr[ balls in bin 1] = (1/n) (1 1/n) n ( ) n (1/n) ( ne ) (1/n) ( e ) = So prob at least balls is j (e/j)j = O((e/) ) (geometric series) 3

1/n 2 if > (e ln n)/ ln ln n What is probability any bin is over? 1/n union bound. Now can bound expected max: With probability 1 1/n, max is O(ln n/ ln ln n). With probability 1/n, max is bigger, but at most n So, expected max O(ln n/ ln ln n) Typical approach: small expectation as small common case plus large rare case Example: coupon collection/stable marriage. Probability didn t get th coupon after r rounds is (1 1/n) r e r/n which is n β for r = βn ln n so probability didn t get some coupon is at msot n n β = n 1 β (using union bound) we say time is O(n ln n) with high probability because we can mae probability n β for any desired β by changing constant that doesn t affect assymptotic claim. sometime say with high probability when prove it for some β > 1 even if didn t prove it for all. Saying almost never above O(n ln n) is a much stronger statement than saying O(n ln n) on average. Tail Bounds Marov Inequality At other times, don t want to get down and dirty with problem. So have developed set of bounding techniques that are basically problem independent. few assumptions, so applicable almost anywhere but for same reason, don t give as tight bounds the more you require of problem, the tighter bounds you can prove. 4

Marov inequality. Pr[Y t] E[Y ]/t Pr[Y te[y ]] 1/t. Only requires an expectation! So very widely applicable. Application: ZP P = RP corp. If RP corp just run both if neither affirms, run again Each iter has probability 1/2 to affirm So expected iterations 2: So ZP P. If ZP P suppose expected time T (n) Run for time 2T (n), then stop and give default answer Probability of default answer at most 1/2 (Marov) So, RP. If flip default answer, corp On flip side, not very strong: balls in bins Pr[> ln n] 1/ ln n for just one bin. inadequate for union bound. Can mae much stronger by generalizing: Pr[h(Y ) > t] E[h(Y )]/t for any positive h. 5