DOCSLIB.ORG

Statistical Distance and the Geometry of Quantum States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Statistical Distance and the Geometry of Quantum States VOLUME 72 30 MAY 1994 NUMBER 22 Statistical Distance and the Geometry of Quantum States Samuel L. Braunstein' and Carlton M. Caves Center for Advanced Studies, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of ¹toMexico, ASuquerque, Negro Mexico 87181-1156 (Received 11 February 1994) By finding measurements that optimally resolve neighboring quantum states, we use statistical distinguishability to define a natural Riemannian metric on the space of quantum-mechanical density operators and to formulate uncertainty principles that are more general and more stringent than standard uncertainty principles. PACS numbers: 03.65.Bz, 02.50.—r, 89.70.+c One task of precision quantum measurements is to de- where p~ = r2. Using this argument, Wootters was led tect a weak signal that produces a small change in the to the distance spD, which he called statistical distance. state of some quantum system. Given an initial quantum Wootters generalized statistical distance to quantum- state, the size of the signal parametrizes a path through mechanical pure states as follows [1]. Consider neighbor- the space of quantum states. Detecting a weak signal expanded in an orthonormal basis ing pure states, I j): is thus equivalent to distinguishing neighboring quantum states along the path. We pursue this point of view by us- (2) ing the theory of parameter estimation to formulate the problem of distinguishing neighboring states. We find measurements that optimally resolve neighboring states, and we characterize their degree of distinguishability in terms of a Riemannian metric, increasing distance corre- Normalization implies that Re((/Id')) = —z(dgldg). sponding to more reliable distinguishability. These con- Measurements described by the one-dimensional projec- siderations lead directly to uncertainty principles that tors lj)(jl can distinguish I@) and lg) according to the are more general and more stringent than standard un- classical metric (1). The quantum distinguishability met- certainty principles. ric should be defined by measurements that resolve the We begin by reviewing Wootters's derivation [1] of two states optimally —i.e., that maximize Eq. (1). a distinguishability metric for probability distributions. The maximum is given by the Hilbert-space angle After drawing N samples from a probability distribution, cos t(1(pig) I), which clearly captures a notion of state distinguishability. The line one can estimate the probabilities p~ as the observed fre- corresponding element, quencies f~, The probability for the frequencies is given — —,'dsps = = 1 — I' = by a multinomial distribution, which for large N is pro- [cos '(l(414) I)]' l(@14» (A'~ I+'~) — — portional to a Gaussian exp[ (N/2)(f~ p~)2/p~] A. nearby distribution pz can be reliably distinguished from (4) ps if the Gaussian exp[ —(N/2)(p~ —ps) /p~] is small. 2"' 2 2 Thus the quadratic form —p~)2/p~ provides a nat- (p~ called the Fubini-Study metric [2], is the natural metric ural (Riemannian) distinguishability metric on the space on the manifold of Hilbert-space rays. Here of probability distributions (PD), Id@&) ld@) —1@)(@Id/) is the projection of ld@) orthogonal to d2 I@). The term in large square brackets, the variance of —= ' = = dspD ) ) p, (dlnp, ) 4) dr, , (1) the phase changes, is non-negative; an appropriate choice 2 ' 2 2 003I-9007/94/72(22)/3439(5)$06. 00 3439 l 994 The American Physical Society VOLUME 72, NUMBER 22 PH YSICAL REVl EVr' LETTERS of basis makes it zero [3]. Thus ds2ps is the maximum tistical deviation is min v N((hx}2) & ]. The v N re- value of ds&D, which means that dsps is the statistical moves the expected 1/~N improvement with the num- distance between neighboring pure states (PS). ber of measurements; the minimum means that statisti- We generalize the notion of statistical distance to im- cal distance is defined in terms of the most discriminating pure quantum states and thus obtain a natural Rieman- procedure for determining the parameter. nian geometry on the space of density operators [see We are thus led to define the distinguishability metric Eqs. (23) and (28)], where no natural inner product by guides the generalization. Our derivation, like Woot- dX' ters's, proceeds in two steps, one classical and one quan- Gs '8) min X((b'X)2)~-] tum mechanical, but it sharpens the formulation of statis- tical distance by highlighting distinct classical and quan- We take the minimum in the two steps mentioned above: tum optimization problems. For the first step, to ob- first, optimization over estimators for a given quantum tain the classical distinguishability metric, we use an ap- measurement to get the classical distinguishability met- proach based on the theory of parameter estimation [4], ric and, second, optimization over all quantum measure- This approach, which is independent of Wootters's work, ments to get the quantum distinguishability metric. maps the problem of state distinguishability onto that of The classical optimization relies on a lower bound. precision determination of a parameter. For the second called the Cramer-Rao bound [7], on the variance of any step, to obtain the quantum distinguishability metric, estimator. The proof of the Cramer-Rao bound proceeds we optimize over att quantum measurements, not just from the trivial identity measurements described by one-dimensional orthogonal projectors. 0 = d(i d(z p((ilX) p((+lX) hx„, , I9) Consider now a curve p(X) on the space of density op- erators. The from neigh- problem of distinguishing p(x) where AX„& = Xe8t((i, . , (rv) —(X„r)x. Taking the boring density operators along the curve is equivalent derivative of this identity with respect to X, we obtain to the problem of determining the value of the param- eter The determination is made from the results X. of d(i d4 p((ilX) p((rv X) measurements. To be general, we must allow arbitrary generalized quantum measurements [5,6], which include ( ~. Bing((„]x)) d(x„t)x all measurements permitted by the rules of quantum me- chanics. A generalized measurement is described by a set of Applying the Schwarz inequality to Eq. (10) yields the non-negative, Hermitian operators E(E), which are com- Cramer Rao bound- in the sense that plete -' xF(x)((~x...p), & )'. d( E(E) = i = (unit operator) . ( where the Fisher information is defined by The quantity labels the "results" of the measurement; ( 2 although written here as a single continuous real variable, """'l ' d(p((lx) l l it could be discrete or multivariate. The probability den- Bx ) sity for result given the parameter is (, X, &p((lx) p((IX) = tr(E(()i(x)) p((lx} BX Consider now N such measurements, with results Converted to the form needed in the definition (8), the (i, . , (iv. One estimates the parameter X via a func- Cramer-Rao bound becomes tion — . A sensible sta- X„r, X„i,((i, , (iv). definition of 1 tistical distance is to measure the parameter increment &((bX)')x ) + &(~x)x ) F X . dX in units of the statistical deviation of the estimator away from the parameter. The appropriate measure of A nonzero value of (bx)x means that the units-corrected deviation is estimator has a systematic bias away from the parameter; x„, (6X)x is zero when the estimator is unbiased, i.e. , when (X,t)x = X locally. ld(x„t )x /dx l The Cramer-Rao bound only places a lower bound on The derivative d(xesr)x/dX removes the local difference the minimum that appears in Eq. (8). Fisher's theo- in the "units" of the estimator and the parameter. The rem [8,9], however, says that asymptotically for large X, subscript X on expectation values reminds one that they maximum-likelihood estimation is unbiased and achieves depend on the parameter. The appropriate unit of sta- the Cramer-Rao bound. Thus, for a given probabil- 3440 VOLUME 72, NUMBER 22 P H YSI CA L R EV I E VV L ETTERS 30 MAY 1994 ity distribution we arrive at the classical distin- ters metric (1) at the boundary can be removed by using p((~X), — — guishability metric ds2PD —F(X)dX2, which, given the coordinates r~, where p& —r~, which essentially remove forms (12) of F, is the Wootters metric (1) for continu- the boundary. One now shows that ous, instead of discrete alternatives. = — The second step, to optimize over quantum measure- dXp' ) dp~lj)(jl+ idX) (S~ Sl )hl~lk)(jl (21) ments, is now seen to be the problem of maximizing the Fisher information over all quantum measurements, i.e., from which it follows that symbolically —dX max . dXtr(Ap') = idX — hI d@o F(X) (14) 2) r~A~~dr~ + ) (p~ pg)A~I, ~ I&(~)) 2 j,k The subscript DO reminds one that this is a metric on = dXRe tr(pAR. '(p')) (22 density operators. The expression for F(X) involves dividing by p((~X), provided that the singular matrix elements of R: (p') so one might expect the quantum distinguishability met- are assigned any finite values consistent with Hermiticity. ric to involve "division" by p. The appropriate sense of Choosing them to vanish conveniently extends R: to this division comes from defining a superoperator the boundary 'R-(o) = -'(p -'(po+op) =) +pa)o ~lj)(kl (») 'R,='(O) =— ). + O&~ iI)(kI (23) (i,&ln, +nato} The second form is written in the orthonormal basis where = is diagonal. In the interior of the We now manipulate the Fisher information to ob- p P. p~ ~ j)(j~ (17) space of density operators —i.e., away from the bound- tain an upper bound ary, where one or more of the eigenvalues pz vanishes- Rp has a well defined inverse 'R:, with matrix elements Retr R: p' F= jE ['R: (O)]&A, = 20&1,/(p~ + pl, ) in the basis that diagonal- d( tr (E(()p) izes P.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conditional Central Limit Theorems for Gaussian Projections
    1 Conditional Central Limit Theorems for Gaussian Projections Galen Reeves Abstract—This paper addresses the question of when projec- The focus of this paper is on the typical behavior when the tions of a high-dimensional random vector are approximately projections are generated randomly and independently of the Gaussian. This problem has been studied previously in the context random variables. Given an n-dimensional random vector X, of high-dimensional data analysis, where the focus is on low- dimensional projections of high-dimensional point clouds. The the k-dimensional linear projection Z is defined according to focus of this paper is on the typical behavior when the projections Z =ΘX, (1) are generated by an i.i.d. Gaussian projection matrix. The main results are bounds on the deviation between the conditional where Θ is a k n random matrix that is independent of X. distribution of the projections and a Gaussian approximation, Throughout this× paper it assumed that X has finite second where the conditioning is on the projection matrix. The bounds are given in terms of the quadratic Wasserstein distance and moment and that the entries of Θ are i.i.d. Gaussian random relative entropy and are stated explicitly as a function of the variables with mean zero and variance 1/n. number of projections and certain key properties of the random Our main results are bounds on the deviation between the vector. The proof uses Talagrand’s transportation inequality and conditional distribution of Z given Θ and a Gaussian approx- a general integral-moment inequality for mutual information.
    [Show full text]
  • Multivariate Statistics Chapter 5: Multidimensional Scaling
    Multivariate Statistics Chapter 5: Multidimensional scaling Pedro Galeano Departamento de Estad´ıstica Universidad Carlos III de Madrid [email protected] Course 2017/2018 Master in Mathematical Engineering Pedro Galeano (Course 2017/2018) Multivariate Statistics - Chapter 5 Master in Mathematical Engineering 1 / 37 1 Introduction 2 Statistical distances 3 Metric MDS 4 Non-metric MDS Pedro Galeano (Course 2017/2018) Multivariate Statistics - Chapter 5 Master in Mathematical Engineering 2 / 37 Introduction As we have seen in previous chapters, principal components and factor analysis are important dimension reduction tools. However, in many applied sciences, data is recorded as ranked information. For example, in marketing, one may record \product A is better than product B". Multivariate observations therefore often have mixed data characteristics and contain information that would enable us to employ one of the multivariate techniques presented so far. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) is a method based on proximities between ob- jects, subjects, or stimuli used to produce a spatial representation of these items. MDS is a dimension reduction technique since the aim is to find a set of points in low dimension (typically two dimensions) that reflect the relative configuration of the high-dimensional data objects. Pedro Galeano (Course 2017/2018) Multivariate Statistics - Chapter 5 Master in Mathematical Engineering 3 / 37 Introduction The proximities between objects are defined as any set of numbers that express the amount of similarity or dissimilarity between pairs of objects. In contrast to the techniques considered so far, MDS does not start from a n×p dimensional data matrix, but from a n × n dimensional dissimilarity or distance 0 matrix, D, with elements δii 0 or dii 0 , respectively, for i; i = 1;:::; n.
    [Show full text]
  • On a Generalization of the Jensen-Shannon Divergence and the Jensen-Shannon Centroid
    On a generalization of the Jensen-Shannon divergence and the JS-symmetrization of distances relying on abstract means∗ Frank Nielsen† Sony Computer Science Laboratories, Inc. Tokyo, Japan Abstract The Jensen-Shannon divergence is a renown bounded symmetrization of the unbounded Kullback-Leibler divergence which measures the total Kullback-Leibler divergence to the aver- age mixture distribution. However the Jensen-Shannon divergence between Gaussian distribu- tions is not available in closed-form. To bypass this problem, we present a generalization of the Jensen-Shannon (JS) divergence using abstract means which yields closed-form expressions when the mean is chosen according to the parametric family of distributions. More generally, we define the JS-symmetrizations of any distance using generalized statistical mixtures derived from abstract means. In particular, we first show that the geometric mean is well-suited for exponential families, and report two closed-form formula for (i) the geometric Jensen-Shannon divergence between probability densities of the same exponential family, and (ii) the geometric JS-symmetrization of the reverse Kullback-Leibler divergence. As a second illustrating example, we show that the harmonic mean is well-suited for the scale Cauchy distributions, and report a closed-form formula for the harmonic Jensen-Shannon divergence between scale Cauchy distribu- tions. We also define generalized Jensen-Shannon divergences between matrices (e.g., quantum Jensen-Shannon divergences) and consider clustering with respect to these novel Jensen-Shannon divergences. Keywords: Jensen-Shannon divergence, Jeffreys divergence, resistor average distance, Bhat- tacharyya distance, Chernoff information, f-divergence, Jensen divergence, Burbea-Rao divergence, arXiv:1904.04017v3 [cs.IT] 10 Dec 2020 Bregman divergence, abstract weighted mean, quasi-arithmetic mean, mixture family, statistical M-mixture, exponential family, Gaussian family, Cauchy scale family, clustering.
    [Show full text]
  • Disease Mapping Models for Data with Weak Spatial Dependence Or
    Epidemiol. Methods 2020; 9(1): 20190025 Helena Baptista*, Peter Congdon, Jorge M. Mendes, Ana M. Rodrigues, Helena Canhão and Sara S. Dias Disease mapping models for data with weak spatial dependence or spatial discontinuities https://doi.org/10.1515/em-2019-0025 Received November 28, 2019; accepted October 26, 2020; published online November 11, 2020 Abstract: Recent advances in the spatial epidemiology literature have extended traditional approaches by including determinant disease factors that allow for non-local smoothing and/or non-spatial smoothing. In this article, two of those approaches are compared and are further extended to areas of high interest from the public health perspective. These are a conditionally specified Gaussian random field model, using a similarity- based non-spatial weight matrix to facilitate non-spatial smoothing in Bayesian disease mapping; and a spatially adaptive conditional autoregressive prior model. The methods are specially design to handle cases when there is no evidence of positive spatial correlation or the appropriate mix between local and global smoothing is not constant across the region being study. Both approaches proposed in this article are pro- ducing results consistent with the published knowledge, and are increasing the accuracy to clearly determine areas of high- or low-risk. Keywords: bayesian modelling; body mass index(BMI); limiting health problems; spatial epidemiology; similarity-based and adaptive models. Background To allocate the scarce health resources to the spatial units that need them the most is of paramount importance nowadays. Methods to identify excess risk in particular areas should ideally acknowledge and examine the extent of potential spatial clustering in health outcomes (Tosetti et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Extractors and the Leftover Hash Lemma 1 Statistical Distance
    6.889 New Developments in Cryptography March 8, 2011 Extractors and the Leftover Hash Lemma Instructors: Shafi Goldwasser, Yael Kalai, Leo Reyzin, Boaz Barak, and Salil Vadhan Lecturer: Leo Reyzin Scribe: Thomas Steinke, David Wilson 1 Statistical Distance We need random keys for cryptography. Ideally, we want to be able to sample uniformly random and independent bits. However, in practice we have imperfect sources of randomness. We would still like to be able to say that keys that are ε-close to uniform are “good enough”. This requires the following definition. The material in the first three sections is based on [V11]. Definition 1 Let X and Y be two random variables with range U. Then the statistical distance between X and Y is defined as 1 X ∆(X, Y ) ≡ | [X = u] − [Y = u]| . 2 P P u∈U For ε ≥ 0, we also define the notion of two distributions being ε-close: X ≈ε Y ⇐⇒ ∆(X, Y ) ≤ ε. The statistical distance satisfies the following nice properties. Lemma 2 Let X and Y be random variables with range U. (i) ∆(X, Y ) = max(P [X ∈ T ] − P [Y ∈ T ]). T ⊂U (ii) For every T ⊂ U, P [Y ∈ T ] ≤ P [X ∈ T ] + ∆(X, Y ). (iii) ∆(X, Y ) is a metric on distributions. (iv) For every randomized function F , ∆(F (X),F (Y )) ≤ ∆(X, Y ). Moreover, we have equality if each realisation f of F is one-to-one. Property (ii) is particularly useful: Suppose that T is the set of random inputs that cause an algorithm to fail and the failure probability on a truly random input X is P [X ∈ T ].
    [Show full text]
  • The Perfect Marriage and Much More: Combining Dimension Reduction, Distance Measures and Covariance
    The Perfect Marriage and Much More: Combining Dimension Reduction, Distance Measures and Covariance Ravi Kashyap SolBridge International School of Business / City University of Hong Kong July 15, 2019 Keywords: Dimension Reduction; Johnson-Lindenstrauss; Bhattacharyya; Distance Measure; Covariance; Distribution; Uncertainty JEL Codes: C44 Statistical Decision Theory; C43 Index Numbers and Aggregation; G12 Asset Pricing Mathematics Subject Codes: 60E05 Distributions: general theory; 62-07 Data analysis; 62P20 Applications to economics Edited Version: Kashyap, R. (2019). The perfect marriage and much more: Combining dimension reduction, distance measures and covariance. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, XXX, XXX-XXX. Contents 1 Abstract 4 2 Introduction 4 3 Literature Review of Methodological Fundamentals 5 3.1 Bhattacharyya Distance . .5 3.2 Dimension Reduction . .9 4 Intuition for Dimension Reduction 10 arXiv:1603.09060v6 [q-fin.TR] 12 Jul 2019 4.1 Game of Darts . 10 4.2 The Merits and Limits of Four Physical Dimensions . 11 5 Methodological Innovations 11 5.1 Normal Log-Normal Mixture . 11 5.2 Normal Normal Product . 13 5.3 Truncated Normal / Multivariate Normal . 15 5.4 Discrete Multivariate Distribution . 19 5.5 Covariance and Distance . 20 1 6 Market-structure, Microstructure and Other Applications 24 6.1 Asset Pricing Application . 25 6.2 Biological Application . 26 7 Empirical Illustrations 27 7.1 Comparison of Security Prices across Markets . 27 7.2 Comparison of Security Trading Volumes, High-Low-Open-Close Prices and Volume-Price Volatilities . 30 7.3 Speaking Volumes Of: Comparison of Trading Volumes . 30 7.4 A Pricey Prescription: Comparison of Prices (Open, Close, High and Low) .
    [Show full text]
  • A Generalization of K-Means by Energy Distance
    K-GROUPS: A GENERALIZATION OF K-MEANS BY ENERGY DISTANCE Songzi Li A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2015 Committee: Maria L. Rizzo, Advisor Christopher M. Rump, Graduate Faculty Representative Hanfeng Chen Wei Ning ii ABSTRACT Maria L. Rizzo, Advisor We propose two distribution-based clustering algorithms called K-groups. Our algorithms group the observations in one cluster if they are from a common distribution. Energy distance is a non-negative measure of the distance between distributions that is based on Euclidean dis- tances between random observations, which is zero if and only if the distributions are identical. We use energy distance to measure the statistical distance between two clusters, and search for the best partition which maximizes the total between clusters energy distance. To implement our algorithms, we apply a version of Hartigan and Wong’s moving one point idea, and generalize this idea to moving any m points. We also prove that K-groups is a generalization of the K-means algo- rithm. K-means is a limiting case of the K-groups generalization, with common objective function and updating formula in that case. K-means is one of the well-known clustering algorithms. From previous research, it is known that K-means has several disadvantages. K-means performs poorly when clusters are skewed or overlapping. K-means can not handle categorical data. K-means can not be applied when dimen- sion exceeds sample size. Our K-groups methods provide a practical and effective solution to these problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Statistical Inference for Astronomers: Multivariate Analysis
    Summer School in Statistics for Astronomers & Physicists June 5{10, 2005 Center for Astrostatistics Pennsylvania State University Statistical Inference for Astronomers: Multivariate Analysis Thriyambakam Krishnan Systat Software Asia{Paci¯c Limited Bangalore, India 1 Multivariate Statistical Analysis: Statistical theory, methods, algorithms, etc. ² for simultaneous study of more than one vari- able Descriptive statistics and graphical represen- ² tation Inference problems similar to univariate ² ¥ based on the multivariate normal Study of relationships between variables and ² ¯nding structure Problems of combining variables and dimen- ² sionality reduction 2 Multivariate Normal Distribution Notation: X s (¹; 2) univariate normal N X: p-column vector X p(¹; §) multivariate normal » N Reasons for studying Multivariate Normal: 1. p-variate generalization of univariate normal; 2. same reasons as for univariate normal in univariate analysis; 3. multivariate central limit theorem; 4. robustness of some procedures; 5. theory and methods analogous to univariate based on , like t and Hotelling's T 2, ANOVA and MANOVA; N 6. not many other multivariate models; 7. mathematically tractable and elegant; 8. similar parameters{mean vector ¹, covariance ma- trix §. 3 Bivariate Normal Let T X = (X1; X2); X s (¹; §); N2 T 11 12 ¹ = (¹1; ¹2); § = " 21 22 # with 12 = 21. § is non-negative de¯nite. Let 2 2 1 = 11; 2 = 22 Correlation coe±cient ½ = 12 p1122 Density:f(x ; x ) = (if § is p.d.) N2 1 2 1 x ¹ x ¹ x ¹ x ¹ 1 [( 1¡ 1 )2 2 ( 1¡ 1 )( 2¡ 2 )+( 2¡ 2 )2 2(1 ½2) ½ e¡ ¡ 1 ¡ 1 2 2 ] 2 2¼12 (1 ½ ) ¡ 2 p (x1; x2) 2 < If (X1; X2) s 2 then N X1; X2 independent ½ = 0 In general ½ = 0 does()not imply independence 4 Bivariate Normal Densities ¹1 = ¹2 = 0; 11 = 22 = 1 ½ = 0:8; ½ = 0:5; ½ = 0; ½ = 0:8; ½ = 0:5; ¡ ¡ 5 In 2 density, term inside the exponential is N 1 T 1 (x ¹) §¡ (x ¹) ¡2 ¡ ¡ 1 and constant is p 1 ; where p = 2: p2¼ § 2 j j This is the form of p density: N 1 1 T § 1 1 exp (x ¹) ¡ (x ¹) p p2¼ § 2 f¡2 ¡ ¡ g j j if § is strictly p.d.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 35: December 4 35.1 the Fundamental Statistical Distances
    36-705: Intermediate Statistics Fall 2019 Lecture 35: December 4 Lecturer: Siva Balakrishnan This and the next lecture are completely optional (and will not be on your final exam). Today we will discuss distances and metrics between distributions that are useful in statistics. I will be loose in distinguishing metrics, distances and divergences (i.e. some of these are not symmetric, and some do not satisfy triangle inequality). We will discuss them in two contexts: 1. There are metrics that are analytically useful in a variety of statistical problems, i.e. they have intimate connections with estimation and testing. 2. There are metrics that are useful in data analysis, i.e. given data we want to measure some notion of distance between (the distribution of) subsets of the data and use this in some way. There is of course overlap between these contexts and so there are distances that are useful in both, but they are motivated by slightly different considerations. 35.1 The fundamental statistical distances There are four notions of distance that have an elevated status in statistical theory. I will define them a bit crudely (trying to avoid some basic measure theory that is necessary) to try to focus on the main ideas. Throughout, we will let P; Q be two probability measures on some sample space, and we denote their densities with respect to some common underlying dominating measure be p and q. To further simplify things, I will assume that this common measure is the Lebesgue measure. 1. Total Variation: The TV distance between two distributions is: Z TV(P; Q) = sup jP (A) − Q(A)j = sup j (p(x) − q(x))dxj; A A where A is just any measurable subset of the sample space, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Statistical Distances and Their Role in Robustness 3
    Statistical Distances and Their Role in Robustness Marianthi Markatou, Yang Chen, Georgios Afendras and Bruce G. Lindsay Abstract Statistical distances, divergences, and similar quantities have a large his- tory and play a fundamental role in statistics, machine learning and associated sci- entific disciplines. However, within the statistical literature, this extensive role has too often been played out behind the scenes, with other aspects of the statistical problems being viewed as more central, more interesting, or more important. The behind the scenes role of statistical distances shows up in estimation, where we of- ten use estimators based on minimizing a distance, explicitly or implicitly, but rarely studying how the properties of a distance determine the properties of the estimators. Distances are also prominent in goodness-of-fit, but the usual question we ask is “how powerful is this method against a set of interesting alternatives” not “what aspect of the distance between the hypothetical model and the alternative are we measuring?” Our focus is on describing the statistical properties of some of the distance mea- sures we have found to be most important and most visible. We illustrate the robust nature of Neyman’s chi-squared and the non-robust nature of Pearson’s chi-squared statistics and discuss the concept of discretization robustness. Marianthi Markatou Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, e-mail: [email protected] Yang Chen arXiv:1612.07408v1 [math.ST] 22 Dec 2016 Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, e-mail: [email protected] Georgios Afendras Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, e-mail: [email protected] Bruce G.
    [Show full text]
  • On Statistical Distance Based Testing of Pseudo Random Sequences and Experiments with PHP and * Debian Openssl
    computers & security 53 (2015) 44e64 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cose On statistical distance based testing of pseudo random sequences and experiments with PHP and * Debian OpenSSL * Yongge Wang a, , Tony Nicol b a Dept. SIS, UNC Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA b University of Liverpool, UK article info abstract Article history: NIST SP800-22 (2010) proposed the state of the art statistical testing techniques for testing Received 10 July 2014 the quality of (pseudo) random generators. However, it is easy to construct natural func- Received in revised form tions that are considered as GOOD pseudorandom generators by the NIST SP800-22 test 10 April 2015 suite though the output of these functions is easily distinguishable from the uniform Accepted 21 May 2015 distribution. This paper proposes solutions to address this challenge by using statistical Available online 2 June 2015 distance based testing techniques. We carried out both NIST tests and LIL based tests on commonly deployed pseudorandom generators such as the standard C linear congruential Keywords: generator, Mersenne Twister pseudorandom generator, and Debian Linux (CVE-2008-0166) Statistical testing pseudorandom generator with OpenSSL 0.9.8c-1. Based on experimental results, we illus- Pseudorandom generators trate the advantages of our LIL based testing over NIST testing. It is known that Debian The law of the iterated logarithm Linux (CVE-2008-0166) pseudorandom generator based on OpenSSL 0.9.8c-1 is flawed and Web security the output sequences are predictable. Our LIL tests on these sequences discovered the NIST randomness testing flaws in Debian Linux implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Saenapark-Dissertation.Pdf
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School CLASSIFICATION OF TRANSIENTS BY DISTANCE MEASURES A Dissertation in Statistics by Sae Na Park c 2015 Sae Na Park Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2015 The dissertation of Sae Na Park was reviewed and approved∗ by the following: G. Jogesh Babu Professor of Statistics Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee John Fricks Associate Professor of Statistics Matthew Reimherr Assistant Professor of Statistics Eric B. Ford Professor of Astronomy Aleksandra Slavkovic Associate Professor of Statistics Chair of Graduate Program ∗Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. Abstract Due to a rapidly increasing size of data in astronomical surveys, statistical methods which can automatically classify newly detected celestial objects in an accurate and efficient way have become essential. In this dissertation, we introduce two methodologies to classify variable stars and transients by using light curves, which are graphs of magnitude (the logarithm measure of brightness of a star) as a function of time. Our analysis focuses on characterizing light curves by using magnitude changes over time increments and developing a classifier with this information. First we present the classifier based on the difference between two distributions of magni- tudes, estimated by the statistical distance measures such as the Kullback-Leibler divergence, the Jensen-Shannon divergence, and the Hellinger distance. Also, we propose a method that groups magnitudes and times by binning and uses frequen- cies in each bin as the variables for classification. Along with these two methods, a way to incorporate other measures into our classifiers, which have been used for classification of light curves, is presented.
    [Show full text]