Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Hierarchical Summarization of Metric Changes

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 1703.07795 v1 pith:PXKPHON4 submitted 2017-03-22 cs.DB

Hierarchical Summarization of Metric Changes

classification cs.DB
keywords algorithmdatametricapproximationdimensionshierarchicalsegmentsadwords
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We study changes in metrics that are defined on a cartesian product of trees. Such metrics occur naturally in many practical applications, where a global metric (such as revenue) can be broken down along several hierarchical dimensions (such as location, gender, etc). Given a change in such a metric, our goal is to identify a small set of non-overlapping data segments that account for the change. An organization interested in improving the metric can then focus their attention on these data segments. Our key contribution is an algorithm that mimics the operation of a hierarchical organization of analysts. The algorithm has been successfully applied, for example within Google Adwords to help advertisers triage the performance of their advertising campaigns. We show that the algorithm is optimal for two dimensions, and has an approximation ratio $\log^{d-2}(n+1)$ for $d \geq 3$ dimensions, where $n$ is the number of input data segments. For the Adwords application, we can show that our algorithm is in fact a $2$-approximation. Mathematically, we identify a certain data pattern called a \emph{conflict} that both guides the design of the algorithm, and plays a central role in the hardness results. We use these conflicts to both derive a lower bound of $1.144^{d-2}$ (again $d\geq3$) for our algorithm, and to show that the problem is NP-hard, justifying the focus on approximation.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.