Scalable Mutual Information Estimation Using Dependence Graphs

By Morteza Noshad, A. Hero. 2018

83 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The Mutual Information (MI) is an often used measure of dependency between two random variables utilized in informa- tion theory, statistics and machine learning. Recently several MI estimators have been proposed that can achieve paramet- ric MSE convergence rate. However, most of the previously proposed estimators have high computational complexity of at least $({N^2})$ . We propose a unified method for empirical non-parametric estimation of general MI function between random vectors in ${\mathbb{R}^d}$ based on $N$ i.i.d. samples. The re- duced complexity MI estimator, called the ensemble depen- dency graph estimator (EDGE), combines randomized locality sensitive hashing (LSH), dependency graphs, and ensemble bias-reduction methods. We prove that EDGE achieves op- timal computational complexity $(N)$ , and can achieve the optimal parametric MSE rate of $O(1/N)$ if the density is $d$ times differentiable. To the best of our knowledge EDGE is the first non-parametric MI estimator that can achieve paramet- ric MSE rates with linear time complexity. We illustrate the utility of EDGE for the analysis of the information plane (IP) in deep learning. Using EDGE we shed light on a controversy on whether or not the compression property of information bottleneck (IB) in fact holds for ReLu and other rectification functions in deep neural networks (DNN).

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Probabilistic & Bayesian Methods

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

  1. Noah A. Smith
  2. Sebastian Ruder
  3. Matthew E. Peters
  4. Mohit Bansal
  5. Luke S. Zettlemoyer
  6. Graham Neubig
  7. Yejin Choi
  8. Percy Liang

In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

  1. Noah A. Smith
  2. Sebastian Ruder
  3. Matthew E. Peters
  4. Ivan Vulic
  5. Jonas Pfeiffer
  6. Iryna Gurevych
  7. Yonatan Belinkov
  8. Goran Glavas

In Probabilistic & Bayesian Methods

  1. Noah A. Smith
  2. Sebastian Ruder
  3. Matthew E. Peters

Citations in the corpus