On Probabilistic Embeddings in Optimal Dimension Reduction
This work addresses a foundational problem in machine learning for data scientists, providing theoretical insights into dimension reduction, but it is incremental as it builds on existing frameworks without introducing a new paradigm.
The paper tackles the theoretical understanding of non-linear dimension reduction algorithms by analyzing a generalized version of multidimensional scaling, revealing that standard computational methods produce non-deterministic and sub-optimal embeddings with misleading clustering structure.
Dimension reduction algorithms are a crucial part of many data science pipelines, including data exploration, feature creation and selection, and denoising. Despite their wide utilization, many non-linear dimension reduction algorithms are poorly understood from a theoretical perspective. In this work we consider a generalized version of multidimensional scaling, which is posed as an optimization problem in which a mapping from a high-dimensional feature space to a lower-dimensional embedding space seeks to preserve either inner products or norms of the distribution in feature space, and which encompasses many commonly used dimension reduction algorithms. We analytically investigate the variational properties of this problem, leading to the following insights: 1) Solutions found using standard particle descent methods may lead to non-deterministic embeddings, 2) A relaxed or probabilistic formulation of the problem admits solutions with easily interpretable necessary conditions, 3) The globally optimal solutions to the relaxed problem actually must give a deterministic embedding. This progression of results mirrors the classical development of optimal transportation, and in a case relating to the Gromov-Wasserstein distance actually gives explicit insight into the structure of the optimal embeddings, which are parametrically determined and discontinuous. Finally, we illustrate that a standard computational implementation of this task does not learn deterministic embeddings, which means that it learns sub-optimal mappings, and that the embeddings learned in that context have highly misleading clustering structure, underscoring the delicate nature of solving this problem computationally.