1
$\begingroup$

Let $\Theta$ be a subset of a metric space. Suppose $(X_\theta)_{\theta \in \Theta}$ is a random process on $\Theta$ which is $L$-Lipschitz and with the property that there exists constants $A, B>0$ such that for every $\epsilon>0$ and $\theta \in \Theta$, it holds that $P(X_\theta \ge \epsilon) \le A\exp(-B\epsilon^2)$.

Question

  • What upper bounds can be obtained on $P(\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} X_\theta \ge \epsilon)$ in terms of the Lipschitz constant $L$, and the covering number of $\Theta$ ?

  • In case the conditions are not sufficient, what can be added in order to obtain any interesting answers ?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You need some Lipschitz (or other smoothness property) on $X_\theta$ in $\theta$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 31, 2019 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ OK, I see. I just added the condition to the question. Thanks. This is so as to be able to bound the covering number of $\{X_\theta | \theta \in \Theta\}$ in terms of that of $\Theta$, right ? $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Jan 31, 2019 at 15:27

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

If for all $\theta \in\Theta$ we have $P(X_\theta\ge\epsilon)\le A\exp(-B\epsilon^2)$ and $\Theta$ has $\epsilon$-packing number $M(\epsilon)$ and additionally $X_\theta$ is $L$-Lipschitz in $\theta$, then $$P(\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} X_\theta>\epsilon(L+1)) \le AM(\epsilon)\exp(-B\epsilon^2) .$$

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Great. Thanks. Where I can find a proof of this / similar claims ? $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Feb 1, 2019 at 6:03
  • $\begingroup$ It's immediate from the Lipschitz property and union bound. Try it as an exercise, and if you still need help, I'll fill in the details. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 1, 2019 at 6:15
  • $\begingroup$ OK, thanks for the the hint. See the proof below. I need to stop being lazy... $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Feb 1, 2019 at 6:57
1
$\begingroup$

Disclaimer: This is just a detailed version of Aryeh's answer.

So, let $\mathcal C_\epsilon$ be $\epsilon/2$-cover for $\Theta$ of minimal cardinality $N(\Theta;\epsilon/2)$. Let $C \in \mathcal C_\epsilon$ and $\theta_0 \in C$. Then because the distance between any two points in $C$ is at most $\epsilon$, one has $$ \sup_{\theta \in C} X_\theta = X_{\theta_0} + \sup_{\theta \in C}\;(X_\theta-X_{\theta_0}) \le X_{\theta_0} + \epsilon L, $$ and so

$P(\sup_{\theta \in C} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L+1)) \le P(X_{\theta_0} \ge \epsilon) \le A\exp(-B\epsilon^2)$.

On the other hand,

$$ \sup_{\theta \in \Theta} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L + 1) \implies \exists \theta \in \Theta | X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L + 1) \implies \exists C \in \mathcal C_\epsilon | \sup_{\theta \in C} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L+1), $$ and so applying the union bound on the finite cover $\mathcal C_\epsilon$, one gets

$$ \begin{split} P\left(\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L + 1)\right) &\le P\left(\bigsqcup_{C \in \mathcal C_\epsilon}\left\{\sup_{\theta \in C} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L+1)\right\} \right) \\ &\le \sum_{C \in \mathcal C_\epsilon}P\left(\sup_{\theta \in C} X_\theta \ge \epsilon(L+1)\right)\\ &\le AN(\Theta;\epsilon/2)\exp(-B\epsilon^2). \end{split} $$ Thus, we have the concentration inequality

$$P\left(\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} X_\theta \ge \epsilon\right) \le AN(\Theta;\epsilon/2)\exp\left(-\frac{B\epsilon^2}{L+1}\right) $$

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ It's not true that the distance of any two points in $C$ is at most $\epsilon$. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 1, 2019 at 12:39
  • $\begingroup$ That's a typo / thinko. I actually meant $2\epsilon$. Thanks. $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Feb 1, 2019 at 16:11
  • $\begingroup$ Actually $\mathcal{C}_\epsilon$ is a cover (of "type" set) and $C\in \mathcal{C}_\epsilon$ is a point -- so we should be talking about the distance between any two points in $\mathcal{C}_\epsilon$. The latter could be large -- roughly as large as the diameter of $\Theta$. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 2, 2019 at 20:23
  • $\begingroup$ I don't get that. I'm not interested by the distance about two points in $C_\epsilon$ (which wouldn't make much sense, since there is no geometry on $\mathcal C_\epsilon$, just a set of things...). I'm interested in the distance between two points $x$ and $y$ with $x, y \in C \in \mathcal C_\epsilon \subseteq \mathcal 2^\Theta$, and this can certainly be talked about, since $C$ is a subset of the metric space $\Theta$. No ? $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Feb 3, 2019 at 11:28
  • $\begingroup$ What is the "type" of $\mathcal{C}_\epsilon$? Is it a subset of $\Theta$? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 3, 2019 at 11:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .