# 随机算法 (Fall 2015)/Chernoff Bound

## Contents

# The Chernoff Bound

Suppose that we have a fair coin. If we toss it once, then the outcome is completely unpredictable. But if we toss it, say for 1000 times, then the number of HEADs is very likely to be around 500. This striking phenomenon, illustrated in the right figure, is called the **concentration**. The Chernoff bound captures the concentration of independent trials.

The Chernoff bound is also a tail bound for the sum of independent random variables which may give us *exponentially* sharp bounds.

Before proving the Chernoff bound, we should talk about the moment generating functions.

## Moment generating functions

The more we know about the moments of a random variable , the more information we would have about . There is a so-called **moment generating function**, which "packs" all the information about the moments of into one function.

**Definition**- The moment generating function of a random variable is defined as where is the parameter of the function.

By Taylor's expansion and the linearity of expectations,

The moment generating function is a function of .

## The Chernoff bound

The Chernoff bounds are exponentially sharp tail inequalities for the sum of independent trials. The bounds are obtained by applying Markov's inequality to the moment generating function of the sum of independent trials, with some appropriate choice of the parameter .

**Chernoff bound (the upper tail)**- Let , where are independent Poisson trials. Let .
- Then for any ,

**Proof.**For any , is equivalent to that , thus where the last step follows by Markov's inequality.

Computing the moment generating function :

Let for . Then,

- .

We bound the moment generating function for each individual as follows.

where in the last step we apply the Taylor's expansion so that where . (By doing this, we can transform the product to the sum of , which is .)

Therefore,

Thus, we have shown that for any ,

- .

For any , we can let to get

The idea of the proof is actually quite clear: we apply Markov's inequality to and for the rest, we just estimate the moment generating function . To make the bound as tight as possible, we minimized the by setting , which can be justified by taking derivatives of .

We then proceed to the lower tail, the probability that the random variable deviates below the mean value:

**Chernoff bound (the lower tail)**- Let , where are independent Poisson trials. Let .
- Then for any ,

**Proof.**For any , by the same analysis as in the upper tail version, For any , we can let to get

## Useful forms of the Chernoff bounds

Some useful special forms of the bounds can be derived directly from the above general forms of the bounds. We now know better why we say that the bounds are exponentially sharp.

**Useful forms of the Chernoff bound**- Let , where are independent Poisson trials. Let . Then
- 1. for ,
- 2. for ,

**Proof.**To obtain the bounds in (1), we need to show that for , and . We can verify both inequalities by standard analysis techniques. To obtain the bound in (2), let . Then . Hence,

# Balls into bins, revisited

Throwing balls uniformly and independently to bins, what is the maximum load of all bins with high probability? In the last class, we gave an analysis of this problem by using a counting argument.

Now we give a more "advanced" analysis by using Chernoff bounds.

For any and , let be the indicator variable for the event that ball is thrown to bin . Obviously

Let be the load of bin .

Then the expected load of bin is

For the case , it holds that

Note that is a sum of mutually independent indicator variable. Applying Chernoff bound, for any particular bin ,

### The case

When , . Write . The above bound can be written as

Let , we evaluate by taking logarithm to its reciprocal.

Thus,

Applying the union bound, the probability that there exists a bin with load is

- .

Therefore, for , with high probability, the maximum load is .

### The case

When , then according to ,

We can apply an easier form of the Chernoff bounds,

By the union bound, the probability that there exists a bin with load is,

- .

Therefore, for , with high probability, the maximum load is .

# Set Balancing

Supposed that we have an matrix with 0-1 entries. We are looking for a that minimizes .

Recall that is the infinity norm (also called norm) of a vector, and for the vector ,

- .

We can also describe this problem as an optimization:

This problem is called set balancing for a reason.

The problem arises in designing statistical experiments. Suppose that we have subjects, each of which may have up to features. This gives us an matrix :
where each column represents a subject and each row represent a feature. An entry indicates whether subject has feature . By multiplying a vector the subjects are partitioned into two disjoint groups: one for -1 and other other for +1. Each gives the difference between the numbers of subjects with feature in the two groups. By minimizing , we ask for an optimal partition so that each feature is roughly as balanced as possible between the two groups. In a scientific experiment, one of the group serves as a control group (对照组). Ideally, we want the two groups are statistically identical, which is usually impossible to achieve in practice. The requirement of minimizing actually means the statistical difference between the two groups are minimized. |

We propose an extremely simple "randomized algorithm" for computing a : for each , let be independently chosen from , such that

This procedure can hardly be called as an "algorithm", because its decision is made disregard of the input . We then show that despite of this obliviousness, the algorithm chooses a good enough , such that for any , with high probability.

**Theorem**- Let be an matrix with 0-1 entries. For a random vector with entries chosen independently and with equal probability from ,
- .

- Let be an matrix with 0-1 entries. For a random vector with entries chosen independently and with equal probability from ,

**Proof.**Consider particularly the -th row of . The entry of contributed by row is .

Let be the non-zero entries in the row. If , then clearly is no greater than . On the other hand if then the nonzero terms in the sum

are independent, each with probability 1/2 of being either +1 or -1.

Thus, for these nonzero terms, each is either positive or negative independently with equal probability. There are expectedly positive 's among these terms, and only occurs when there are less than positive 's, where . Applying Chernoff bound, this event occurs with probability at most

The same argument can be applied to negative 's, so that the probability that is at most . Therefore, by the union bound,

- .

Apply the union bound to all rows.

- .

How good is this randomized algorithm? In fact when there exists a matrix such that for any choice of .