Performance

Eunseop Kim

All the tests were done on an Arch Linux x86_64 machine with an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU (1.90GHz).

Empirical likelihood computation

We show the performance of computing empirical likelihood with el_mean(). We test the computation speed with simulated data sets in two different settings: 1) the number of observations increases with the number of parameters fixed, and 2) the number of parameters increases with the number of observations fixed.

Increasing the number of observations

We fix the number of parameters at $p = 10$, and simulate the parameter value and $n \times p$ matrices using rnorm(). In order to ensure convergence with a large $n$, we set a large threshold value using el_control().

library(ggplot2)
library(microbenchmark)
set.seed(3175775)
p <- 10
par <- rnorm(p, sd = 0.1)
ctrl <- el_control(th = 1e+10)
result <- microbenchmark(
  n1e2 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(100 * p), ncol = p), par = par, control = ctrl),
  n1e3 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(1000 * p), ncol = p), par = par, control = ctrl),
  n1e4 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(10000 * p), ncol = p), par = par, control = ctrl),
  n1e5 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(100000 * p), ncol = p), par = par, control = ctrl)
)

Below are the results:

result
#> Unit: microseconds
#>  expr        min          lq       mean      median         uq        max neval
#>  n1e2    453.516    483.9785    519.820    506.9765    561.047    635.126   100
#>  n1e3   1217.122   1426.7830   1529.494   1498.5125   1616.928   2591.748   100
#>  n1e4  10774.932  12500.4380  14532.837  14777.8785  15916.589  20910.570   100
#>  n1e5 166787.126 199253.4965 230125.156 223292.9620 252870.390 368487.249   100
#>  cld
#>  a  
#>  a  
#>   b 
#>    c
autoplot(result)
#> Warning: `aes_string()` was deprecated in ggplot2 3.0.0.
#> ℹ Please use tidy evaluation idioms with `aes()`.
#> ℹ See also `vignette("ggplot2-in-packages")` for more information.
#> ℹ The deprecated feature was likely used in the microbenchmark package.
#>   Please report the issue at
#>   <https://github.com/joshuaulrich/microbenchmark/issues/>.
#> This warning is displayed once per session.
#> Call `lifecycle::last_lifecycle_warnings()` to see where this warning was
#> generated.

Increasing the number of parameters

This time we fix the number of observations at $n = 1000$, and evaluate empirical likelihood at zero vectors of different sizes.

n <- 1000
result2 <- microbenchmark(
  p5 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(n * 5), ncol = 5),
    par = rep(0, 5),
    control = ctrl
  ),
  p25 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(n * 25), ncol = 25),
    par = rep(0, 25),
    control = ctrl
  ),
  p100 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(n * 100), ncol = 100),
    par = rep(0, 100),
    control = ctrl
  ),
  p400 = el_mean(matrix(rnorm(n * 400), ncol = 400),
    par = rep(0, 400),
    control = ctrl
  )
)

result2
#> Unit: microseconds
#>  expr        min          lq        mean      median         uq        max
#>    p5    732.216    772.8475    846.6501    802.7335    850.748   3986.381
#>   p25   2916.283   2948.9595   3044.9608   2982.4215   3046.942   6324.455
#>  p100  23360.153  25893.5815  28169.3293  26497.7300  30921.291  46764.128
#>  p400 267684.807 291042.6775 325703.3096 312955.2160 349761.823 455057.346
#>  neval cld
#>    100 a  
#>    100 a  
#>    100  b 
#>    100   c
autoplot(result2)

On average, evaluating empirical likelihood with a 100000×10 or 1000×400 matrix at a parameter value satisfying the convex hull constraint takes less than a second.