Quasi-Monte Carlo for 3D Sliced Wasserstein
Khai Nguyen, Nicola Bariletto, Nhat Ho

TL;DR
This paper introduces Quasi-Monte Carlo methods for approximating the 3D Sliced Wasserstein distance, improving accuracy over traditional Monte Carlo approaches and extending to unbiased stochastic optimization with theoretical guarantees.
Contribution
It proposes Quasi-Sliced Wasserstein (QSW) and Randomized QSW (RQSW) methods for 3D Wasserstein distance approximation, with convergence proofs and practical evaluations.
Findings
QSW outperforms Monte Carlo in approximation accuracy.
RQSW provides an unbiased estimator suitable for stochastic optimization.
Experimental results show improved performance in 3D point-cloud tasks.
Abstract
Monte Carlo (MC) integration has been employed as the standard approximation method for the Sliced Wasserstein (SW) distance, whose analytical expression involves an intractable expectation. However, MC integration is not optimal in terms of absolute approximation error. To provide a better class of empirical SW, we propose quasi-sliced Wasserstein (QSW) approximations that rely on Quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC) methods. For a comprehensive investigation of QMC for SW, we focus on the 3D setting, specifically computing the SW between probability measures in three dimensions. In greater detail, we empirically evaluate various methods to construct QMC point sets on the 3D unit-hypersphere, including the Gaussian-based and equal area mappings, generalized spiral points, and optimizing discrepancy energies. Furthermore, to obtain an unbiased estimator for stochastic optimization, we extend QSW to…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2024 spotlight
1. The paper is well-written and mostly clear. 2. Adequate background and literature review are provided. 3. The visualizations are very nice. 4. Lots of numerical experiments are conducted and many of them are realistic data examples.
1. The paper is mostly a combination of existing methods, which lacks certain novelty. However, this paper is a helpful reference for people that needs to numerically compute Sliced Wasserstein distance, so it seems worth publishing in ICLR or somewhere similar. 2. The randomized QMC method for Sliced Wasserstein distance is motivated by stochastic optimization, but it could also be used to obtain confidence intervals on the estimates. This is probably worth discussing, both in theory and with a
The paper is overall clear and well presented, and the results are original and novel to the knowledge of the reviewer. The strengths of the paper includes: 1. The absolute error reduction is a novel perspective, as traditional SW estimators only guarantees consistency and unbiasedness, but a bound for the absolute error is usually missing. This paper sheds new light on the faithfulness of SW estimating beyond MC regime. 2. The paper provides a thorough investigation of the construction of equal
Some weaknesses: 1. The contributions seem limited, as the paper mainly applies existing QMC methods to SW estimation, whereas little was investigated on how QMC and SW interact. Specifically, the paper claims that the Koksma-Hlawka inequality is the main guarantee of lower absolute error. While all listed QMC methods do achieve low discrepancy, on the SW side it does not seem trivial to claim that the SW integrand satisfies the smoothness assumption for the absolute error bound to hold. For ins
1. The paper is well-written and is easy to follow. 2. The proposed methods for SW distance approximation seem to consistently outperform the regular MC SW distance approximation. 3. The authors present the approach in a mathematically rigorous manner and prove the main results of the paper.
1. The improved SW approximation seems not to translate its benefits in large-scale training experiments. It might be worthwhile to recheck that with more powerful auto-encoder architectures, which can better benefit from the improved distance approximation. 2. Figure 1 is not very informative (might be moved to supplementary?), some figures are too small (fig 1, 2), and point clouds in all the figures are too small. 3. There is the complexity analysis of approximations in the paper, but it st
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques · Computer Graphics and Visualization Techniques · Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
MethodsFocus
