research-article

Open access

A pre-expectation calculus for probabilistic sensitivity

Authors:

Alejandro Aguirre,

Benjamin Lucien Kaminski,

Joost-Pieter Katoen,

Christoph MathejaAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, Volume 5, Issue POPL

Article No.: 52, Pages 1 - 28

https://doi.org/10.1145/3434333

Published: 04 January 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Sensitivity properties describe how changes to the input of a program affect the output, typically by upper bounding the distance between the outputs of two runs by a monotone function of the distance between the corresponding inputs. When programs are probabilistic, the distance between outputs is a distance between distributions. The Kantorovich lifting provides a general way of defining a distance between distributions by lifting the distance of the underlying sample space; by choosing an appropriate distance on the base space, one can recover other usual probabilistic distances, such as the Total Variation distance. We develop a relational pre-expectation calculus to upper bound the Kantorovich distance between two executions of a probabilistic program. We illustrate our methods by proving algorithmic stability of a machine learning algorithm, convergence of a reinforcement learning algorithm, and fast mixing for card shuffling algorithms. We also consider some extensions: using our calculus to show convergence of Markov chains to the uniform distribution over states and an asynchronous extension to reason about pairs of program executions with different control flow.

References

[1]

David Aldous. 1983. Random Walks on Finite Groups and Rapidly Mixing Markov Chains. In Séminaire de Probabilités XVII 1981/82 (Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 986 ). Springer-Verlag, 243-297. https://eudml.org/doc/113445

[2]

Philip Amortila, Doina Precup, Prakash Panangaden, and Marc G. Bellemare. 2020. A Distributional Analysis of SamplingBased Reinforcement Learning Algorithms. In The 23rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, AISTATS 2020, 26-28 August 2020, Online [Palermo, Sicily, Italy] (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 108 ), Silvia Chiappa and Roberto Calandra (Eds.). PMLR, 4357-4366. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v108/amortila20a.html

[3]

Robert B. Ash and Catherine A. Doleans-Dade. 2000. Probability and Measure Theory. Academic Press.

[4]

Arthur Azevedo de Amorim, Marco Gaboardi, Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias, and Justin Hsu. 2014. Really natural linear indexed type-checking. In Symposium on Implementation and Application of Functional Programming Languages (IFL), Boston, Massachusetts. ACM Press, 5 : 1-5 : 12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2746325.2746335

Digital Library

[5]

Arthur Azevedo de Amorim, Marco Gaboardi, Justin Hsu, Shin-ya Katsumata, and Ikram Cherigui. 2017. A semantic account of metric preservation. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Paris, France. 545-556. https://doi.org/10.1145/3009837.3009890

Digital Library

[6]

Giorgio Bacci, Radu Mardare, Prakash Panangaden, and Gordon D. Plotkin. 2018. An Algebraic Theory of Markov Processes. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS 2018, Oxford, UK, July 09-12, 2018, Anuj Dawar and Erich Grädel (Eds.). ACM, 679-688. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209108.3209177

Digital Library

[7]

Gilles Barthe, Thomas Espitau, Benjamin Grégoire, Justin Hsu, and Pierre-Yves Strub. 2018. Proving expected sensitivity of probabilistic programs. PACMPL 2, POPL ( 2018 ), 57 : 1-57 : 29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3158145

Digital Library

[8]

Kevin Batz, Benjamin Lucien Kaminski, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Christoph Matheja, and Thomas Noll. 2019. Quantitative Separation Logic: A Logic for Reasoning About Probabilistic Pointer Programs. PACMPL 3, POPL ( 2019 ), 34 : 1-34 : 29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290347

Digital Library

[9]

Kevin Batz, Benjamin Lucien Kaminski, Joost-Pieter Katoen, and Christoph Matheja. 2021. Relatively Complete Verification of Probabilistic Programs-An Expressive Language for Expectation-based Reasoning. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 5, POPL ( 2021 ).

Digital Library

[10]

Nick Benton. 2004. Simple Relational Correctness Proofs for Static Analyses and Program Transformations. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Venice, Italy. 14-25. https://doi.org/10. 1145/964001.964003

Digital Library

[11]

Olivier Bousquet and André Elisseef. 2002. Stability and Generalization. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2 ( 2002 ), 499-526. http://www.jmlr.org/papers/v2/bousquet02a.html

[12]

Swarat Chaudhuri, Sumit Gulwani, and Roberto Lublinerman. 2010. Continuity analysis of programs. In ACM SIGPLANSIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Madrid, Spain. 57-70. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1706299.1706308

Digital Library

[13]

Swarat Chaudhuri, Sumit Gulwani, and Roberto Lublinerman. 2012. Continuity and robustness of programs. Commun. ACM 55, 8 ( 2012 ), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1145/2240236.2240262

Digital Library

[14]

Marco Gaboardi, Andreas Haeberlen, Justin Hsu, Arjun Narayan, and Benjamin C. Pierce. 2013. Linear dependent types for diferential privacy. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), Rome, Italy. 357-370. https://doi.org/10.1145/2429069.2429113

Digital Library

[15]

Daniel Gebler, Kim G. Larsen, and Simone Tini. 2016. Compositional bisimulation metric reasoning with probabilistic process calculi. Logical Methods in Computer Science 12, 4 ( 2016 ). https://doi.org/10.2168/LMCS-12 ( 4 :12) 2016

[16]

Daniel Gebler and Simone Tini. 2018. SOS specifications for uniformly continuous operators. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 92 ( 2018 ), 113-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss. 2017. 09.011

Digital Library

[17]

Friedrich Gretz, Joost-Pieter Katoen, and Annabelle McIver. 2014. Operational versus weakest pre-expectation semantics for the probabilistic guarded command language. Perform. Evaluation 73 ( 2014 ), 110-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peva. 2013. 11.004

Digital Library

[18]

Moritz Hardt, Ben Recht, and Yoram Singer. 2016. Train faster, generalize better: Stability of stochastic gradient descent. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), New York, NY (Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 48 ). JMLR.org, 1225-1234. http://jmlr.org/proceedings/papers/v48/hardt16.html

[19]

Zixin Huang, Zhenbang Wang, and Sasa Misailovic. 2018. PSense: Automatic Sensitivity Analysis for Probabilistic Programs. In Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis-16th International Symposium, ATVA 2018, Los Angeles, CA, USA, October 7-10, 2018, Proceedings (LNCS, Vol. 11138 ), Shuvendu K. Lahiri and Chao Wang (Eds.). Springer, 387-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01090-4_23

[20]

Benjamin Lucien Kaminski and Joost-Pieter Katoen. 2017. A weakest pre-expectation semantics for mixed-sign expectations. In LICS. IEEE Computer Society, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS. 2017.8005153

[21]

Benjamin Lucien Kaminski, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Christoph Matheja, and Federico Olmedo. 2016. Weakest Precondition Reasoning for Expected Run-Times of Probabilistic Programs. In European Symposium on Programming (ESOP), Eindhoven, The Netherlands (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9632 ). Springer-Verlag, 364-389. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49498-1_15

Digital Library

[22]

Dexter Kozen. 1985. A Probabilistic PDL. J. Comput. System Sci. 30, 2 ( 1985 ), 162-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0022-0000 ( 85 ) 90012-1

[23]

Annabelle McIver and Carroll Morgan. 2005. Abstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems. Springer.

Digital Library

[24]

Carroll Morgan, Annabelle McIver, and Karen Seidel. 1996. Probabilistic Predicate Transformers. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 18, 3 ( 1996 ), 325-353.

Digital Library

[25]

Federico Olmedo, Friedrich Gretz, Nils Jansen, Benjamin Lucien Kaminski, Joost-Pieter Katoen, and Annabelle McIver. 2018. Conditioning in Probabilistic Programming. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 40, 1 ( 2018 ), 4 : 1-4 : 50. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3156018

Digital Library

[26]

Federico Olmedo, Benjamin Lucien Kaminski, Joost-Pieter Katoen, and Christoph Matheja. 2016. Reasoning about Recursive Probabilistic Programs. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS ' 16, New York, NY, USA, July 5-8, 2016, Martin Grohe, Eric Koskinen, and Natarajan Shankar (Eds.). ACM, 672-681. https://doi.org/10.1145/2933575.2935317

Digital Library

[27]

David Park. 1969. Fixpoint Induction and Proofs of Program Properties. Machine Intelligence 5 ( 1969 ).

[28]

Benedetto Piccoli and Francesco Rossi. 2016. On Properties of the Generalized Wasserstein Distance. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 222, 3 ( 01 Dec 2016 ), 1339-1365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-016-1026-7

[29]

Jason Reed and Benjamin C Pierce. 2010. Distance Makes the Types Grow Stronger: A Calculus for Diferential Privacy. In ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP), Baltimore, Maryland. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1863543.1863568

Digital Library

[30]

Richard S. Sutton. 1988. Learning to Predict by the Methods of Temporal Diferences. Mach. Learn. 3 ( 1988 ), 9-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00115009

[31]

Cédric Villani. 2008. Optimal Transport: Old and New. Springer-Verlag.

[32]

Peixin Wang, Hongfei Fu, Krishnendu Chatterjee, Yuxin Deng, and Ming Xu. 2020. Proving expected sensitivity of probabilistic programs with randomized variable-dependent termination time. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 4, POPL ( 2020 ), 25 : 1-25 : 30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371093

Digital Library

[33]

Daniel Winograd-Cort, Andreas Haeberlen, Aaron Roth, and Benjamin C. Pierce. 2017. A framework for adaptive diferential privacy. In ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP), Oxford, England. 10 : 1-10 : 29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3110254

Digital Library

Cited By

Chatterjee KGoharshady ENovotný PŽikelić Đ(2024)Equivalence and Similarity Refutation for Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36564628:PLDI(2098-2122)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3656462
Chatterjee KGoharshady AMeggendorfer TŽikelić Đ(2024)Quantitative Bounds on Resource Usage of Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36498248:OOPSLA1(362-391)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649824
Feng SChen MSu HKaminski BKatoen JZhan N(2023)Lower Bounds for Possibly Divergent Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35860517:OOPSLA1(696-726)Online publication date: 6-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586051
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A pre-expectation calculus for probabilistic sensitivity
1. Mathematics of computing
  1. Probability and statistics
2. Theory of computation
  1. Logic
    1. Logic and verification
  2. Semantics and reasoning
    1. Program reasoning

Recommendations

A lambda-calculus foundation for universal probabilistic programming
ICFP 2016: Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming

We develop the operational semantics of an untyped probabilistic λ-calculus with continuous distributions, and both hard and soft constraints,as a foundation for universal probabilistic programming languages such as Church, Anglican, and Venture. Our ...
Bayonet: probabilistic inference for networks
PLDI 2018: Proceedings of the 39th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation

Network operators often need to ensure that important probabilistic properties are met, such as that the probability of network congestion is below a certain threshold. Ensuring such properties is challenging and requires both a suitable language for ...
Bayonet: probabilistic inference for networks
PLDI '18

Network operators often need to ensure that important probabilistic properties are met, such as that the probability of network congestion is below a certain threshold. Ensuring such properties is challenging and requires both a suitable language for ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages

Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages Volume 5, Issue POPL

January 2021

1789 pages

EISSN:2475-1421

DOI:10.1145/3445980

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 Owner/Author.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 January 2021

Published in PACMPL Volume 5, Issue POPL

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

University of Wisconsin
National Science Foundation SaTC
National Science Foundation CCF
Facebook

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

14
Total Citations
View Citations
1,123
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)248
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)37

Reflects downloads up to 09 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Chatterjee KGoharshady ENovotný PŽikelić Đ(2024)Equivalence and Similarity Refutation for Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36564628:PLDI(2098-2122)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3656462
Chatterjee KGoharshady AMeggendorfer TŽikelić Đ(2024)Quantitative Bounds on Resource Usage of Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36498248:OOPSLA1(362-391)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649824
Feng SChen MSu HKaminski BKatoen JZhan N(2023)Lower Bounds for Possibly Divergent Probabilistic ProgramsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35860517:OOPSLA1(696-726)Online publication date: 6-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586051
Moosbrugger MMüllner JKovács L(2023)Automated Sensitivity Analysis for Probabilistic LoopsiFM 202310.1007/978-3-031-47705-8_2(21-39)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47705-8_2
Zhou ZHuang ZMisailovic S(2023)AquaSense: Automated Sensitivity Analysis of Probabilistic Programs via Quantized InferenceAutomated Technology for Verification and Analysis10.1007/978-3-031-45332-8_16(288-301)Online publication date: 19-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45332-8_16
Sun YFu HChatterjee KGoharshady A(2023)Automated Tail Bound Analysis for Probabilistic Recurrence RelationsComputer Aided Verification10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_2(16-39)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_2
Vasilenko EVazou NBarthe G(2022)Safe couplings: coupled refinement typesProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35476436:ICFP(596-624)Online publication date: 31-Aug-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3547643
Aguirre AKatsumata SKura S(2022)Weakest preconditions in fibrationsMathematical Structures in Computer Science10.1017/S096012952200033032:4(472-510)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129522000330
Huang ZDutta SMisailovic S(2022)Automated quantized inference for probabilistic programs with AQUAInnovations in Systems and Software Engineering10.1007/s11334-021-00433-318:3(369-384)Online publication date: 20-Jan-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-021-00433-3
Pardo RJohnsen ESchaefer IWąsowski A(2022)A Specification Logic for Programs in the Probabilistic Guarded Command LanguageTheoretical Aspects of Computing – ICTAC 202210.1007/978-3-031-17715-6_24(369-387)Online publication date: 3-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17715-6_24
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents