A determinantal point process for column subset selection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Dimensionality reduction is a first step of many machine learning pipelines. Two popular approaches are principal component analysis, which projects onto a small number of well chosen but non-interpretable directions, and feature selection, which selects a small number of the original features. Feature selection can be abstracted as a numerical linear algebra problem called the column subset selection problem (CSSP). CSSP corresponds to selecting the best subset of columns of a matrix X ∈ ℝN × d, where best is often meant in the sense of minimizing the approximation error, i.e., the norm of the residual after projection of X onto the space spanned by the selected columns. Such an optimization over subsets of 1,dots,d is usually impractical. One workaround that has been vastly explored is to resort to polynomial-cost, random subset selection algorithms that favor small values of this approximation error. We propose such a randomized algorithm, based on sampling from a projection determinantal point process (DPP), a repulsive distribution over a fixed number k of indices 1,dots,d that favors diversity among the selected columns. We give bounds on the ratio of the expected approximation error for this DPP over the optimal error of PCA. These bounds improve over the state-of-the-art bounds of volume sampling when some realistic structural assumptions are satisfied for X. Numerical experiments suggest that our bounds are tight, and that our algorithms have comparable performance with the double phase algorithm, often considered to be the practical state-of-the-art. Column subset selection with DPPs thus inherits the best of both worlds: good empirical performance and tight error bounds.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Dec 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
9 papers.
- 2021Determinantal point processes based on orthogonal polynomials for sampling minibatches in SGDcited by 11
- 2024Small coresets via negative dependence: DPPs, linear statistics, and concentrationcited by 4
- 2026Data Curation for Machine Learning Interatomic Potentials by Determinantal Point Processescited by 3
- 2023DPPMask: Masked Image Modeling with Determinantal Point Processescited by 2
- 2023On sampling determinantal and Pfaffian point processes on a quantum computercited by 1
- 2021Nonparametric estimation of continuous DPPs with kernel methodscited by 0
- 2024Randomized Approach to Matrix Completion: Applications in Recommendation Systems and Image Inpaintingcited by 0
- 2025Bypassing orthogonalization in the quantum DPP samplercited by 0
- 2026Spectral Certificates and Projection-DPP Rounding for Determinantal MAP Selectioncited by 0
- 2026Spectral Certificates and Projection-DPP Rounding for Determinantal MAP Selection17 Jun 2026
- 2026Data Curation for Machine Learning Interatomic Potentials by Determinantal Point Processes23 Mar 2026
- 2025Bypassing orthogonalization in the quantum DPP sampler7 Mar 2025
- 2024Small coresets via negative dependence: DPPs, linear statistics, and concentration1 Nov 2024
- 2024Randomized Approach to Matrix Completion: Applications in Recommendation Systems and Image Inpainting4 Mar 2024
- 2023On sampling determinantal and Pfaffian point processes on a quantum computer25 May 2023
- 2023DPPMask: Masked Image Modeling with Determinantal Point Processes13 Mar 2023
- 2021Determinantal point processes based on orthogonal polynomials for sampling minibatches in SGD11 Dec 2021
- 2021Nonparametric estimation of continuous DPPs with kernel methods27 Jun 2021