Authors: Xinyu Yuan, Yan Qiao, Zonghui Wang, Wenzhi Chen
Organizations: College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China · School of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, China
Sketch techniques have been extensively studied in recent years and are especially well-suited to data streaming scenarios, where the sketch summary is updated quickly and compactly. However, it is challenging to recover the current state from these summaries in a way that is accurate, fast, and real. In this paper, we seek a solution that reconciles this tension, aiming for near-perfect recovery with lightweight computational procedures. Focusing on linear sketching problems of the form Φf→f, our study proceeds in three stages. First, we dissect existing techniques and show the root cause of the sketching dilemma: an orthogonal information loss. Second, we examine how generative priors can be leveraged to bridge the information gap. Third, we propose FLORE, a novel generative sketching framework that embraces these analyses to achieve the best of all worlds. More importantly, FLORE can be trained without access to ground-truth data. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate FLORE's ability to provide high-quality recovery, and support summary with low computing overhead, outperforming previous methods by up to 1000 times in error reduction and 100 times in processing speed compared to learning-based solutions.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison of our generative solution and existing solutions. From (a) to (c), we present an overview of the full pipelines of three sketching paradigms. In (d), our proposal achieves the best trade-off among accuracy, fidelity and speed under a 1MB sketch memory budget on the CAIDA-2018 dataset.
Figure 2: Matrix formulation of Count-Min. The linear sketching problem can be analyzed via simple matrix operations.
Figure 3: Overview of four types of GMs considered in this work.
Symbol
Description
Symbol
Description
f
Ground-truth (frequency) vector
Φ
Linear sketching matrix
b
Measurement (counters) vector
k
Number of hash functions in sketch
z
Prior (Gaussian) vector
N
Number of distinct items
I
Key set of data stream
m
Number of total counters in sketch
Ti
i -th invertible transformation function
(ε,ς)
Coefficient & error probability of sketch
ϵ
Error introduced by missing elements
mbf
Number of bits in Bloom Filter
Table 1: List of Main Symbols
Figure 4: Compare compressive sensing with sketch techniques.
Figure 5: Illustration of our insights. (a) The GT f cannot be recovered due to orthogonal information loss in the null space. (b) We leverage GMs to generate the null-space component which is in harmony with the range-space component.
Figure 6: Visualization of Streaming data distribution fitting. The first row shows results on Gaussian distributions, while the second row shows results on Zipfian distributions. From left to right, the scale of the data stream increases.
Figure 8
Figure 7: Performance comparison of different generative models under Gaussian and Zipfian distributions. For better visualization, metrics across different dimensions are normalized by the best result (higher the better).
GM (# of steps)
ARE ↓
WMRE ↓
Gen. Time (s)
DDPM (500)
0.22±0.04
0.25±0.05
7.58
Flow Matching (15)
0.32±0.11
0.30±0.10
0.92
FGM (1)
0.18±0.07
0.28±0.06
0.001
Table 2: Additional comparison with flow matching on Zipfian-100K.
Figure 8: Performance overview across different GMs. FGM achieves the most favorable trade-off in sketching tasks.
Figure 9: System overview of FLORE . (a) illustrates the control-plane recovery procedure, where flow-based generators are trained. (b) depicts the process of online tuning and scaling. The data-plane structure details are explained in (c).
Figure 10: The architecture of FLORE . FLORE is modeled as an invertible mapping in the latent space.
Figure 11: Scalable flow-based generative model for online learning in one-pass data streams.
Figure 12: The underlying cINN architecture used in FLORE .
Method (256KB)
ARE ↓
WMRE ↓
Training Iters
FLORE w/ Jac.
1.20±0.78
0.41±0.18
200s∼400s
FLORE w/o Jac.
1.03±0.38
0.45±0.10
50s∼100s
Table 3: Ablation of the Jacobian Loss Term
Figure 13: Ablation comparing Count-Min Sketch and Count-Min Sketch + EM refinement (with ten steps).
# of EM Steps
1
3
5
10
20
50
Total Time (s) ↓
0.54
1.72
3.22
6.85
13.91
31.05
Normal. ARE ↓
9.71
2.04
1.55
1.41
1.40
1.39
Table 4: Time-accuracy Trade-off of the EM Algorithm
Figure 14: Data structures used in FLORE : a Bloom Filter for key tracking, a Count-Min Sketch for store infrequent items, and an augmented filter for saving frequent items as key-value pairs.
Figure 20
Real-World
# of Keys
# of Items
Skewness
Synthetic
# of Keys
# of Items
Skewness
CAIDA
157269
2000000
291.56
Zipf-icml
∼30000
1000000
24.27
Webdocs
125623
2000000
25.42
Zipf
∼28000
1000000
125.93
MAWI
41471
2000000
92.67
Pareto
∼28000
1000000
10.24
Kosarak
30495
2000000
89.56
Exponential
∼26000
1000000
3.81
Retail
16470
908576
71.27
Log-Normal
∼30000
1000000
5.64
Table 5: Statistics of Real-world and Synthetic Data Streams Used in the Evaluation
Figure 16: Sketching performance on five real-world datasets.
Figure 17: Sketching performance on five synthetic datasets.
Figure 18: Comparison of stream processing speed on CAIDA with 1MB memory ( Green means better than CM).
Figure 19: Training loss curves of FLORE on the CAIDA dataset.
Table 6: ARE Performance decline with increased CAIDA network traffic fluctuation. Negative values indicate no degradation.
Table 7: ARE Performance decline with natural drift in CAIDA network traffic. Negative values indicate no degradation.
Table 8: ARE Performance decline with spatial shift in CAIDA network traffic. Negative values indicate no degradation.
Table 6: ARE Performance decline with increased CAIDA network traffic fluctuation. Negative values indicate no degradation.
Figure 20: Comparing FLORE with the Count-Min and SOTA compressive sensing algorithms by replacing the FGM.
Figure 21: Comparison of computation times for recovery procedure.
Figure 22: CDFs for the AAE and ARE of FLORE and its variants on the real-world Kosarak dataset.
Figure 23: CDFs for the AAE and ARE of FLORE and its variants on the synthetic Zipf dataset.
Figure 24: Ablation comparing FLORE and FLORE without the stream filtering mechanism or separation design, where (x) at the bottom indicates that the data stream has skewness x .
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 25: Visualizations of the learned flow-based mapping during training.
Figure 26: Visualizations of sketch recovery under a fixed 32KB memory budget. From left to right, we present the recovery results of FLORE , CM, CS, NZE, LCM, and LCS, compared against the ground-truth sample distribution. To enhance readability, every 100 consecutive keys are aggregated in the x-axis.
Figure 27: Visualizations of sketch recovery under a fixed 128KB memory budget. From left to right, we present the recovery results of FLORE , CM, CS, NZE, LCM, and LCS, compared against the ground-truth sample distribution. To enhance readability, every 100 consecutive keys are aggregated in the x-axis.
Figure 28: Visualizations of sketch recovery under a fixed 256KB memory budget. From left to right, we present the recovery results of FLORE , CM, CS, NZE, LCM, and LCS, compared against the ground-truth sample distribution. To enhance readability, every 100 consecutive keys are aggregated in the x-axis.
Over the past 25 years, sketching and sampling have become widely used tools for accelerating large-scale regression. In iterative randomized solvers, a basic design choice is whether to reuse the same sketch or draw fresh randomness at every step. For (under-constrained) iterative ridge regression with column sampling, whether fresh sketches offer provable advantages has remained open: We show that they do. Fresh sketching lets us analyze error only along the current residual solution, rather than uniformly over the entire Gram matrix. This directional view yields sharper convergence guarantees for leverage score and ridge leverage score sampling and, more importantly, leads to residual-aware sampling rules. By minimizing the variance of the relevant sketched matrix-vector product, we derive an oracle distribution and practical approximations to the oracle distribution, including a mixture sampling distribution with (somewhat weaker) convergence guarantees. Experiments on synthetic and real data, including ridge probes on Qwen2.5 representations, support our theory, showing substantially faster convergence.
Linkai Ma, Qilin Li, Petros Drineas
Purdue University · University of Wisconsin-Madison
Existing vector-sketch models treat recognition and generation as separate tasks, leaving a gap for streaming interfaces that must understand a drawing as it is being made. We present SketchMamba, a single causal sequence model that continuously classifies a sketch from any partial prefix while simultaneously generating its continuation. We achieve this by applying a dense per-step classification loss to a selective state-space backbone. Evaluated on a 58-class subset of the Quick, Draw! dataset, SketchMamba yields 94.93% final-step accuracy and a progressive-accuracy Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.706, crossing 90% of its final accuracy by the time 70% of the strokes are drawn. In a matched-budget comparison, the 1.55 million-parameter backbone ties a causal Transformer while outperforming recurrent and convolutional baselines. Ablations confirm that the dense supervision regime, rather than the architecture alone, drives the early-prediction capability. The results demonstrate that a single causal hidden state can unify progressive recognition and autoregressive generation without auxiliary encoders or task-specific branching.
Kavish Jhaveri, Arya Shah
The National High School, Ahmedabad, India · Indian Institute of Technology, Gandhinagar, India
Estimating the number of distinct elements in a data stream is well understood when repeated elements are identical. In modern settings, however, observations are high-dimensional and noisy, so repeated instances of the same object are only approximately similar -- for example, different images of the same individual may vary significantly at the pixel level. Classical sketches such as HyperLogLog rely on consistent hash values for identical elements and break down in this regime. Recent work on robust distinct counting in general metric spaces achieves Θ(n) memory, which is tight in the worst case. We show that substantially improved memory guarantees are possible under geometric structure common in learned representations. We introduce MaxSketch, a simple max-linear sketch built from random Gaussian projections, and prove that it succeeds in estimating the number of distinct latent objects. Concretely, we show that under this assumption m=O(logn/ε2) random projections (and hence O(logn/ε2) memory) suffice to recover the true distinct count within a (1+ε) factor. Experiments on image streams confirm that MaxSketch accurately estimates distinct counts and generalizes beyond the training regime. Our results bridge classical streaming algorithms and modern representation learning, showing how geometric structure can fundamentally reduce the complexity of distinct counting.