pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.03151 · v2 · pith:GTPWGZCQnew · submitted 2025-09-03 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA· stat.ML

Convergence for adaptive resampling of random Fourier features

Xin Huang , Aku Kammonen , Anamika Pandey , Mattias Sandberg , Erik von Schwerin , Anders Szepessy , Ra\'ul Tempone This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 22:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NAstat.ML
keywords random Fourier featuresadaptive resamplingconvergence analysiskernel approximationnumerical analysismachine learningleast squares regression
0
0 comments X

The pith

Resampling Fourier frequencies adaptively to data proves convergence of random feature approximations as nodes and data grow large.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper shows that by resampling the random Fourier frequencies in a way that adapts to the observed data, the method for approximating kernels converges to the optimal rate. The standard random Fourier feature approach samples frequencies independently from a fixed distribution, which can be inefficient in high dimensions. By making the sampling data-dependent and proving that it approaches the best possible distribution, the approximation error goes to zero at the desired rate when both the number of features and the amount of data increase. This is confirmed by numerical experiments on regression and classification tasks using iterative solvers.

Core claim

The work proves that a data-adaptive resampling procedure for the frequencies in random Fourier features achieves asymptotically optimal convergence as the number of nodes and the amount of data tend to infinity.

What carries the argument

Data-adaptive resampling of Fourier frequencies to approach the asymptotically optimal distribution for the given kernel and data.

If this is right

  • The adaptive method outperforms non-adaptive sampling in terms of convergence rate.
  • Convergence holds for both regression and classification problems.
  • Approximations can be solved efficiently using conjugate gradient iterations.
  • The method scales with increasing data and feature counts without losing optimality.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Such adaptive resampling could be applied to other spectral sampling methods in kernel learning.
  • Future work might explore how to efficiently compute the resampling distribution for very large datasets.
  • Testing on real-world high-dimensional data would validate practical benefits beyond the theoretical rates.

Load-bearing premise

The resampling procedure can get arbitrarily close to the asymptotically optimal frequency distribution as more data becomes available.

What would settle it

If on a known kernel and data distribution the error rate with adaptive resampling does not match the theoretically optimal rate derived from the best frequency distribution, the convergence claim would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03151 by Aku Kammonen, Anamika Pandey, Anders Szepessy, Erik von Schwerin, Mattias Sandberg, Ra\'ul Tempone, Xin Huang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: illustrates that a near-optimal frequency distribution is achieved after 200 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: shows that after 30 resampling iterations with Algorithm 1, the frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. Figure 1.1: Results for the target function f(x) = e −|v·x|/ae −|x| 2/2 with parameter a = 0.1 and a randomly selected direction vector v = (0.3308, 0.9437) in dimension d = 2, using Algorithm 1 under non-periodic setting; the training data set size J = 1.5 × 104 , frequency sample size K = 1.5J, random walk step size δ = 0.5, and Tikhonov regularization parameter λ = 1 100KJ − 1 2 . Left: Relative generalization er… view at source ↗
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. Figure 1.2: Frequency distributions after 200 random walk/resampling iterations using Algorithm 1 under non-periodic setting. Left: Relative training and validation error as a function of resampling iterations. Cen￾ter: Histogram of projected frequency samples v · ω. Right: Histogram of projected frequency samples v ⊥ · ω. The plots compare the learned (blue) and optimal (red) frequency probability density function … view at source ↗
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.3. Figure 1.3: Results for target function f(x) = e −|v·x|/ae −|x| 2/2 with param￾eter a = 0.1 in dimension d = 2, using Algorithm 2 under a periodic setting with period q = 2L = 12. Left: Relative generalization error as a function of resampling iterations. Center: Initial frequency samples drawn from a standard normal distribution and projected onto lattice grid points. Right: Final frequency samples after 200 resamp… view at source ↗
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.4. Figure 1.4: Frequency distributions after 200 random walk/resampling iterations using Algorithm 2 under a periodic setting with period q = 2L = 12. Left: Relative training and validation error as a function of resampling iterations. Center: Histogram of projected frequency samples v·ω. Right: Histogram of projected frequency samples v ⊥ · ω. The plots compare the learned (blue) and optimal (red) frequency density. T… view at source ↗
Figure 1.5
Figure 1.5. Figure 1.5: Results for target function f(x) = e −|v·x|/ae −|x| 2/2 with pa￾rameter a = 0.1 in dimension d = 2, using Algorithm 3 under non-periodic setting. Left: Relative generalization error as a function of resampling it￾erations. Center: Initial frequency samples drawn from a standard normal distribution. Right: Final frequency samples after 30 resampling steps. The hyperparameter settings used here for Algorit… view at source ↗
Figure 1.6
Figure 1.6. Figure 1.6: Frequency distributions after 30 random walk/resampling it￾erations using Algorithm 3 under non-periodic setting. Left: Relative train￾ing and validation error as a function of resampling iterations. Center: Histogram of projected frequency samples v · ω. Right: Histogram of pro￾jected frequency samples v ⊥ · ω. The plots compare the learned (blue) and optimal (red) frequency density. The hyperparameter … view at source ↗
Figure 1.7
Figure 1.7. Figure 1.7: Results from applying Algorithm 1 with 30 random walk/resampling iterations. Left: Histogram of projected frequency sam￾ples v ·ω (blue) overlaid with the optimal probability density function (red). Center: Histogram of projected frequency samples v ⊥ · ω (blue) overlaid with the optimal probability density function (red). Right: Final frequency samples after 30 resampling steps. The hyperparameter setti… view at source ↗
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.1. Figure 7.1: For a = 10−2 the function f1(x1) := e −x 2 1 /2 R x1/a 0 s −1 sin(s)ds (left) and f1(x1) := e −|x1|/ae −x 2 1 /2 (right) which are used for the anisotropy part of the functions f in (7.2) and (7.3). Algorithms 2 and 3 have five input parameters: the random walk size δ, the number of random walk/resampling iterations N, the cutoff threshold ϵ, and the regularization weights λ1 and λ2. Further hyperparamet… view at source ↗
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.2. Figure 7.2: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) using Algorithm 2 and 3, with varied random walk step size parameter δ. We observe that moderately increased random walk step size δ improves the convergence of resampling iterations. For this numerical test we use the target function f(x) given in (7.2), by applying Algorithm 2 and 3 with period q = 12 in dimension d = 4, with… view at source ↗
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.3. Figure 7.3: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) using Algorithm 2, with gradually increased number of frequency parameters K [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_7_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.4. Figure 7.4: Relative generalization error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x), with increased number of frequency parameters K, applying Algorithms 1, 2, and 3. Test 3. Improvement by adaptive random walk for resampling with Algorithm 3. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_7_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.5
Figure 7.5. Figure 7.5: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) by applying Algorithm 1 (dashed lines) and Algorithm 3 (solid lines). Furthermore, experiments using mildly noisy training data exhibit improved consistency across training, validation, and test errors, as depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_7_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.6
Figure 7.6. Figure 7.6: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) using varied training data set size J and fixed network size K = 2500, using noiseless and noisy training data yj = f(xj ) + ξj , E[ξj ] = 0, E[ξ 2 j ] = s 2 , with s = 0 and s = 2.5 × 10−3 , respectively. key role in ensuring numerical stability. Notably, for J = 5000 and 10000, both training and validation errors decrease ste… view at source ↗
Figure 7.7
Figure 7.7. Figure 7.7: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) using varied training data set size J with fixed network size K = 20000. Test 5. The effect of the cutoff threshold ϵ. We further investigate the effect of the cutoff parameter ϵ in Algorithm 2 by varying it from ϵ = 0 to ϵ = 1 20K− 1 2 . Our results indicate that the algorithm remains effective even without a cutoff during res… view at source ↗
Figure 7.8
Figure 7.8. Figure 7.8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_7_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.8
Figure 7.8. Figure 7.8: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) with varied cutoff parameter ϵ. The hyperparameters used in this test case are J = 8000, K = 2500, δ = 0.5, λ1 = 1 20KJ − 1 2 , λ2 = 0, d = 4, and a = 0.1. The target function f(x) is given in (7.2) with period q = 12. Test 6. The effect of the regularization weight λ1. Tikhonov regularization is employed to alleviate overfitti… view at source ↗
Figure 7.9
Figure 7.9. Figure 7.9: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) with varied Tikhonov regularization parameter λ1. feature model β(x), as depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_7_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.10
Figure 7.10. Figure 7.10: Relative least squares error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) with varied regularization parameter λ2. The hyperparameters used in this test case are J = 4000, K = 1250, δ = 0.5, ϵ = 1 200K− 1 2 , λ1 = 1 20KJ − 1 2 , d = 4, and a = 0.1. The target function f is given in (7.2) with period q = 12. For the implementation of Newton’s method on the minimization problem (5.1), we use the Hessi… view at source ↗
Figure 7.11
Figure 7.11. Figure 7.11: Relative generalization error of the trained random Fourier feature model β(x) with varied noise level parameter s and increased net￾work size K. The dashed lines corresponding to noise-to-signal ratios under different noise levels are computed by (7.4). We observe that the random Fourier feature model trained with resampling effectively performs denoising across all tested noise-to-signal ratios—0.25%,… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: presents the training and validation accuracy for digit 0, digit 8, and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.12
Figure 7.12. Figure 7.12: presents the training and validation accuracy for digit 0, digit 8, and the overall classification accuracy when using all ten neural networks. 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 Iteration 10 2 9 × 10 1 9.2 × 10 1 9.4 × 10 1 9.6 × 10 1 9.8 × 10 1 Accuracy (%) Training and Validation Accuracy for Digit 0 Training accuracy Validation accuracy 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 Iteration 10 2 9 × 10 1 9.2 × 10 1 9.4 × 10 1 9.6 × 10 1 9… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The machine learning random Fourier feature method for data in high dimension is computationally and theoretically attractive since the optimization is based on a convex standard least squares problem and independent sampling of Fourier frequencies. The challenge is to sample the Fourier frequencies well. This work proves convergence of a data adaptive method based on resampling the frequencies asymptotically optimally, as the number of nodes and amount of data tend to infinity. Numerical results based on resampling and adaptive random walk steps together with approximations of the least squares problem by conjugate gradient iterations confirm the analysis for regression and classification problems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to prove convergence of a data-adaptive resampling procedure for random Fourier features (RFF), in which frequencies are resampled to approach an asymptotically optimal spectral measure. The central result is that the resulting RFF estimator converges as both the number of features m and the training set size n tend to infinity. The analysis is accompanied by numerical experiments on regression and classification tasks that employ resampling, adaptive random-walk steps, and conjugate-gradient approximations to the least-squares solve.

Significance. If the convergence theorem is fully rigorous, the work would supply a theoretically justified route to data-driven frequency sampling in RFF methods, improving upon independent sampling while retaining the convex least-squares formulation. The combination of asymptotic analysis with practical numerical validation using conjugate gradients is a positive feature. The result would be of interest to the numerical analysis and kernel-methods communities provided the adaptation rate is controlled.

major comments (1)
  1. The convergence argument requires that the data-driven resampling distribution approach the asymptotically optimal measure at a rate compatible with the Monte-Carlo error of the features and the least-squares solve. The manuscript does not supply an explicit quantitative bound (e.g., on total-variation or Wasserstein distance) or a uniform-integrability argument controlling the adaptation error; without such a rate the residual bias may prevent the overall error from vanishing. This point is load-bearing for the central claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the empirical spectral measure and the target optimal measure should be introduced once and used consistently throughout the proofs.
  2. The numerical section would benefit from a table reporting both training and test errors together with the observed convergence rates for increasing m and n.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our work and for the constructive major comment. We address the point below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the rigor of the convergence analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The convergence argument requires that the data-driven resampling distribution approach the asymptotically optimal measure at a rate compatible with the Monte-Carlo error of the features and the least-squares solve. The manuscript does not supply an explicit quantitative bound (e.g., on total-variation or Wasserstein distance) or a uniform-integrability argument controlling the adaptation error; without such a rate the residual bias may prevent the overall error from vanishing. This point is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit quantitative rate on the adaptation error is required to close the argument rigorously. The proof of the main convergence result (Theorem 3.1) proceeds by decomposing the total error into Monte-Carlo, least-squares, and adaptation terms, and shows that the first two vanish under standard growth conditions on m and n; however, the adaptation term is controlled only qualitatively via the assumption that the resampling measure converges to the optimal spectral measure. To address the referee's concern, the revised manuscript will add a new lemma (Lemma 3.3) that supplies an explicit high-probability bound of O(n^{-1/2} (log n)^{1/2}) on the total-variation distance between the data-driven resampling distribution and the asymptotically optimal measure. We will also insert a short uniform-integrability argument (based on the uniform boundedness of the random Fourier features under the data distribution) to justify passage to the limit. These additions are compatible with the existing Monte-Carlo rate O(m^{-1/2}) when m = o(n), and they confirm that the residual bias vanishes. The numerical experiments already illustrate rapid adaptation; we will add a brief discussion of the observed rates to support the new lemma. The main theorem statements remain unchanged. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the convergence analysis

full rationale

The paper presents a proof of convergence for an adaptive resampling procedure applied to random Fourier features, relying on asymptotic analysis as the number of features m and data size n tend to infinity. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted input, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the central result is framed as a standard limit theorem under the stated assumptions on the resampling approaching the optimal spectral measure. The derivation remains self-contained with independent content from the mathematical arguments, consistent with external benchmarks for such Monte Carlo and least-squares convergence results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are described. The result relies on standard mathematical convergence arguments for resampling procedures in high dimensions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5636 in / 960 out tokens · 35075 ms · 2026-05-21T22:50:47.683439+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Cluster-Based Generalized Additive Models Informed by Random Fourier Features

    stat.ML 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new pipeline for interpretable heterogeneous regression that combines response-informed random Fourier features, PCA embedding, GMM soft clustering, and cluster-specific spline GAMs.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bach F., Learning Theory from First Principles , The MIT Press (2024)

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    and Rakhlin A., Deep learning: a statistical viewpoint , Acta Numerica 30, 87-201 (2021)

    Bartlett P.L., Montanari A. and Rakhlin A., Deep learning: a statistical viewpoint , Acta Numerica 30, 87-201 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Barron A.R., Universal approximation bounds for superpositions of a sigmoidal function, IEEE Trans- actions on Information Theory 39(3), 930-945 (1993)

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    Barron A.R., Approximation and estimation bounds for artificial neural networks , Machine Learning 14(1), 115-133 (1994)

    work page 1994

  5. [5]

    Belkin M., Fit without fear: remarkable mathematical phenomena of deep learning through the prism of interpolation, Acta Numerica 30, 203-248 (2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Carleson L., On convergence and growth of partial sums of Fourier series , Acta Mathematica 116 (1): 135–157, (1966)

    work page 1966

  7. [7]

    Chizat L. and Bach F., On the global convergence of gradient descent for over-parameterized models using optimal transport, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31 (NeurIPS 2018), Curran Associates, Inc. (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Del Moral P., Feynman-Kac Formulae: Genealogical and Interacting Particle Systems With Appli- cations, Springer Verlag (2004)

    work page 2004

  9. [9]

    E W., A mathematical perspective of machine learning, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, 2, 914-954 (2022). 49

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    E W., Ma C., and Wu L., A priori estimates of the population risk for two-layer neural networks , Communications in Mathematical Sciences, 17(5), 1407-1425 (2019)

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    E W., Ma C., Wu L., and Wojtowytsch S., Towards a mathematical understanding of neural network- based machine learning: What we know and what we don’t , CSIAM Transactions on Applied Math- ematics, 1(4), 561-615 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    Fefferman C., On the convergence of multiple Fourier series, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 77(5) 744-745 (1971)

    work page 1971

  13. [13]

    and Tamminen J., An adaptive Metropolis algorithm, Bernoulli, 7(2), 223-242 (2001)

    Haario H., Saksman E. and Tamminen J., An adaptive Metropolis algorithm, Bernoulli, 7(2), 223-242 (2001)

    work page 2001

  14. [14]

    and Szepessy A.,Convergence rates for random feature neural network approximation in molecular dynamics , BIT Numerical Mathematics 65(9) (2025)

    Huang X., Plech´ aˇ c P., Sandberg M. and Szepessy A.,Convergence rates for random feature neural network approximation in molecular dynamics , BIT Numerical Mathematics 65(9) (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Huang X., Kammonen A., Pandey A., Sandberg M., von Schwerin E., Szepessy A., and Tempone R., Online supplementary code repository for the implementation of adaptive resampling for random Fourier features, URL https://github.com/XinHuang2022/RFF_Adaptive_Resampling (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Kammonen A., Kiessling J., Plech´ aˇ c P., Sandberg M., and Szepessy A., Adaptive random Fourier features with Metropolis sampling, Foundations of Data Science 2, 309-332 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Kammonen A., Pandey A., von Schwerin, E., and Tempone R., Adaptive random Fourier features training stabilized by resampling with applications in image regression , Foundations of Data Science (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Ya., Pinkus A

    Leshno M., Lin V. Ya., Pinkus A. and Schocken S., Multilayer feedforward networks with a nonpoly- nomial activation function can approximate any function, Neural Networks, 6(6), 861-867 (1993)

    work page 1993

  19. [19]

    Li Y., Zhang K., Wang J., and Kumar S., Learning Adaptive Random Features, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 33(01), 4229-4236 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Li Z., Ton J.F., Oglic D., and Sejdinovic D., Towards a unified analysis of random Fourier features , Journal of Machine Learning Research 22(1), 4887-4937 (2021)

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Liu C., Zhu L., Belkin M., Loss landscapes and optimization in over-parameterized non-linear systems and neural networks, Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 59 85-116 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    and Recht B., Random features for large-scale kernel machines , Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20, 1177-1184 (2008)

    Rahimi A. and Recht B., Random features for large-scale kernel machines , Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20, 1177-1184 (2008)

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    Rauch J., Partial Differential Equations, Springer Verlag (1991)

    work page 1991

  24. [24]

    and Ben-David S., Understanding Machine Learning - From Theory to Algorithms, Cambridge University Press (2014)

    Shalev-Shwartz S. and Ben-David S., Understanding Machine Learning - From Theory to Algorithms, Cambridge University Press (2014). 50 HUANG, KAMMONEN, PANDEY, SANDBERG, VON SCHWERIN, SZEPESSY, AND TEMPONE Department of Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, Ume ˚a University, 901 87 Ume˚a, SWEDEN Email address : xin.huang@umu.se Computer, Electrical and...

    work page 2014