Hypothesis Selection via Weighted Medians

We revisit extending the Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance between probability distributions to the multi-dimensional setting, and make new arguments about the proper way to approach this generalization. Our proposed formulation maximizes the difference over orthogonal dominating rectangular ranges (d-sided rectangles in R^d), and is an integral probability metric. We also prove that the distance between a distribution and a sample from the distribution converges to 0 as the sample size grows, and bound this rate. Moreover, we show that one can, up to this same approximation error, compute the distance efficiently in 4 or fewer dimensions; specifically, the runtime is near-linear in the size of the sample needed for that error. With this, we derive a delta-precision two-sample hypothesis test using this distance. Finally, we show these metrics and approximation properties do not hold for other popular variants.

In likelihood-free hypothesis testing (LFHT), given samples from two unknown distributions $P,Q$ on $[n]$ with $\mathrm{d_{TV}}(P,Q)\geq\varepsilon$, and from a third distribution $D\in\{P,Q\}$, the goal is to identify whether $D=P$ or $D=Q$. We study asymmetric likelihood-free hypothesis testing, where the sample budgets $s_P$ and $s_Q$ for $P$ and $Q$ may differ, and characterize the feasible triples $(s_P,s_Q,s_D)$ up to logarithmic factors. We establish that unequal reference budgets can give a polynomial saving. For instance, for constant separation, $n$ samples from $P$ and $n^{3/4}$ from $Q$ allow testing with $\widetilde O(n^{1/4})$ samples from $D$, whereas both existing baselines---symmetric LFHT and unequal-sample closeness testing---require $Ω(\sqrt n)$ samples from $D$. We further apply our results to non-adaptive distribution 2-clustering, where the sample allocation among $k$ distributions must be fixed before observing any data. We obtain matching upper and lower bounds for this problem up to logarithmic factors in terms of the domain size, number of distributions, smaller cluster size, and separation, both with one cluster distribution known and with both unknown. Comparing with known bounds for adaptive sample allocation gives a worst-case adaptivity gap of $\widetildeΘ(k^{1/4})$.

We study the sample complexity of robust binary hypothesis testing under three standard contamination models: $\varepsilon$-additive (Huber), $\varepsilon$-subtractive, and $\varepsilon$-total variation (TV), denoted by $n^*_{\mathrm{Hub}}(\varepsilon)$, $n^*_{\mathrm{Sub}}(\varepsilon)$, and $n^*_{\mathrm{TV}}(\varepsilon)$, respectively. For subtractive contamination, we show that least favourable distributions exist and provide explicit formulas for the same, bringing this model in line with the classical Huber and TV models. Next we show that in all three models, sample complexity may be highly unstable in the contamination parameter $\varepsilon$, increasing by polynomial factors even for $o(\varepsilon)$ perturbations. Similarly, there may be polynomial factor gaps between the sample complexities when $\varepsilon$ is known exactly versus when it is known up to $o(\varepsilon)$ error. Despite the instability of the sample complexity in all models, we show that the sample complexities across models are comparable up to constant-factor rescaling of $\varepsilon$. Specifically, for any fixed $δ_0>0$, the following hold for all distributions $p$ and $q$: (i) $n^*_{\mathrm{Hub}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{TV}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{Hub}}(2\varepsilon)$, (ii) $n^*_{\mathrm{Sub}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{TV}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{Sub}}((2+δ_0)\varepsilon)$, and (iii) $n^*_{\mathrm{Sub}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{Hub}}(\varepsilon) \lesssim n^*_{\mathrm{Sub}}((1+δ_0)\varepsilon)$, and the scaling constants are tight. Finally, we extend our results to adaptive versions of the contamination models.