On UMAP's true loss function
  UMAP has supplanted t-SNE as state-of-the-art for visualizing
high-dimensional datasets in many disciplines, but the reason for its success
is not well understood. In this work, we investigate UMAP's sampling based
optimization scheme in detail. We derive UMAP's effective loss function in
closed form and find that it differs from the published one. As a consequence,
we show that UMAP does not aim to reproduce its theoretically motivated
high-dimensional UMAP similarities. Instead, it tries to reproduce similarities
that only encode the shared $k$ nearest neighbor graph, thereby challenging the
previous understanding of UMAP's effectiveness. Instead, we claim that the key
to UMAP's success is its implicit balancing of attraction and repulsion
resulting from negative sampling. This balancing in turn facilitates
optimization via gradient descent. We corroborate our theoretical findings on
toy and single cell RNA sequencing data.
