Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Introduction to Coresets: Accurate Coresets

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1910.08707 v1 pith:D3S2NGLP submitted 2019-10-19 cs.LG cs.CGstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.CGstat.ML
keywords coresetcoresetsproblemsresultsaccuratealgorithmscodecomputer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

A coreset (or core-set) of an input set is its small summation, such that solving a problem on the coreset as its input, provably yields the same result as solving the same problem on the original (full) set, for a given family of problems (models, classifiers, loss functions). Over the past decade, coreset construction algorithms have been suggested for many fundamental problems in e.g. machine/deep learning, computer vision, graphics, databases, and theoretical computer science. This introductory paper was written following requests from (usually non-expert, but also colleagues) regarding the many inconsistent coreset definitions, lack of available source code, the required deep theoretical background from different fields, and the dense papers that make it hard for beginners to apply coresets and develop new ones. The paper provides folklore, classic and simple results including step-by-step proofs and figures, for the simplest (accurate) coresets of very basic problems, such as: sum of vectors, minimum enclosing ball, SVD/ PCA and linear regression. Nevertheless, we did not find most of their constructions in the literature. Moreover, we expect that putting them together in a retrospective context would help the reader to grasp modern results that usually extend and generalize these fundamental observations. Experts might appreciate the unified notation and comparison table that links between existing results. Open source code with example scripts are provided for all the presented algorithms, to demonstrate their practical usage, and to support the readers who are more familiar with programming than math.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. How to Select Datapoints for Efficient Human Evaluation of NLG Models?

    cs.CL 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Selecting human-evaluation items by metric variance, metric consistency, output diversity, or IRT-based informativeness matches random-sampling ranking accuracy with roughly 70% of the annotation budget in WMT23 and SummEval.

Pith tools