Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Tsallis Regularized Optimal Transport and Ecological Inference

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1609.04495 v1 pith:HNIMLO4E submitted 2016-09-15 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords optimaltransporttrotecologicalinferencejointdistributiondistributions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Optimal transport is a powerful framework for computing distances between probability distributions. We unify the two main approaches to optimal transport, namely Monge-Kantorovitch and Sinkhorn-Cuturi, into what we define as Tsallis regularized optimal transport (\trot). \trot~interpolates a rich family of distortions from Wasserstein to Kullback-Leibler, encompassing as well Pearson, Neyman and Hellinger divergences, to name a few. We show that metric properties known for Sinkhorn-Cuturi generalize to \trot, and provide efficient algorithms for finding the optimal transportation plan with formal convergence proofs. We also present the first application of optimal transport to the problem of ecological inference, that is, the reconstruction of joint distributions from their marginals, a problem of large interest in the social sciences. \trot~provides a convenient framework for ecological inference by allowing to compute the joint distribution --- that is, the optimal transportation plan itself --- when side information is available, which is \textit{e.g.} typically what census represents in political science. Experiments on data from the 2012 US presidential elections display the potential of \trot~in delivering a faithful reconstruction of the joint distribution of ethnic groups and voter preferences.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools