Timeline for Bounding the probability Jaccard distance with total variation distance
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2020 at 1:16 | answer | added | John Jiang | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 27, 2020 at 20:40 | comment | added | John Jiang | @Suvrit, yes your hunch is correct. This is already known, in fact proved by my coauthor in the linked paper above already (but in slight disguise)! See Theorem IV.5 of arxiv.org/pdf/1809.04052.pdf | |
| Dec 27, 2020 at 20:15 | comment | added | Suvrit | I feel the answer to your question should be simple, but am out of time rn to think; you may find the link interesting: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… --- also, actually the Jaccard distance wikipedia page states an upper bound of the form 2J/(1+J), so I feel this type of bound should be kinda known. | |
| Dec 27, 2020 at 19:19 | comment | added | John Jiang | @Suvrit thanks for the reference! I don't see immediately how to apply the transform but it brings up an interesting question what's the inverse image of the probability Jaccard distance under the transform. | |
| Dec 27, 2020 at 2:05 | comment | added | Suvrit | Maybe you find the Steinhaus transform based definition of Jaccard helpful for proving the bound because the upper bound you've stated looks like that transform! mathoverflow.net/questions/18084/… | |
| Dec 26, 2020 at 20:24 | history | edited | John Jiang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Dec 26, 2020 at 20:13 | history | edited | John Jiang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Dec 26, 2020 at 20:08 | history | asked | John Jiang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |