Statistics > Machine Learning
[Submitted on 28 Oct 2019 (v1), last revised 29 Oct 2019 (this version, v2)]
Title:Missing Not at Random in Matrix Completion: The Effectiveness of Estimating Missingness Probabilities Under a Low Nuclear Norm Assumption
View PDFAbstract:Matrix completion is often applied to data with entries missing not at random (MNAR). For example, consider a recommendation system where users tend to only reveal ratings for items they like. In this case, a matrix completion method that relies on entries being revealed at uniformly sampled row and column indices can yield overly optimistic predictions of unseen user ratings. Recently, various papers have shown that we can reduce this bias in MNAR matrix completion if we know the probabilities of different matrix entries being missing. These probabilities are typically modeled using logistic regression or naive Bayes, which make strong assumptions and lack guarantees on the accuracy of the estimated probabilities. In this paper, we suggest a simple approach to estimating these probabilities that avoids these shortcomings. Our approach follows from the observation that missingness patterns in real data often exhibit low nuclear norm structure. We can then estimate the missingness probabilities by feeding the (always fully-observed) binary matrix specifying which entries are revealed or missing to an existing nuclear-norm-constrained matrix completion algorithm by Davenport et al. [2014]. Thus, we tackle MNAR matrix completion by solving a different matrix completion problem first that recovers missingness probabilities. We establish finite-sample error bounds for how accurate these probability estimates are and how well these estimates debias standard matrix completion losses for the original matrix to be completed. Our experiments show that the proposed debiasing strategy can improve a variety of existing matrix completion algorithms, and achieves downstream matrix completion accuracy at least as good as logistic regression and naive Bayes debiasing baselines that require additional auxiliary information.
Submission history
From: George Chen [view email][v1] Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:01:47 UTC (793 KB)
[v2] Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:25:33 UTC (794 KB)
Current browse context:
stat.ML
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.