NeuroCOLT

Neural Networks and Computational Learning Theory

 

About NeuroCOLT

Papers Archive

1994 1995
1996 1997
1998 1999
2000 2001

Books

info@neurocolt.org

NeuroCOLT Technical Report NC-TR-97-023

The Perceptron algorithm vs. Winnow:
linear vs. logarithmic mistake bounds
when few input variables are relevant

Jyrki Kivinen
University of Helsinki, Finland

Manfred Warmuth
University of California, Santa Cruz, USA

Peter Auer
Technische Universitaet Graz, Austria

Abstract
We give an adversary strategy that forces the Perceptron algorithm to make $\Omega(k N)$ mistakes in learning monotone disjunctions over $N$ variables with at most $k$ literals. In contrast, Littlestone's algorithm Winnow makes at most $O(k\log N)$ mistakes for the same problem. Both algorithms use thresholded linear functions as their hypotheses. However, Winnow does multiplicative updates to its weight vector instead of the additive updates of the Perceptron algorithm. The Perceptron algorithm is an example of {\em additive\/} algorithms, which have the property that their weight vector is always a sum of a fixed initial weight vector and some linear combination of already seen instances. We show that an adversary can force any additive algorithm to make $(N+k-1)/2$ mistakes in learning a monotone disjunction of at most $k$ literals. Simple experiments show that for $k\ll N$, Winnow clearly outperforms the Perceptron algorithm also on nonadversarial random data.

Download Compressed Postscript