I have been studying from the book "Understanding Machine Learning - From Theory to Algorithms" by Shai Shalev-Shwartz and Shai Ben-David I am struck at corollary 3.2 which states that
Every finite hypothesis class is PAC learnable with sample complexity
$ m_\mathcal{H} (\epsilon, \delta) \le \left \lceil \frac{ \log{\left(\frac{|\mathcal{H}|}{\delta}\right)} }{\epsilon} \right \rceil $
where $ \mathcal{H} $ is the hypothesis class and $ \epsilon > 0 $ and $ \delta \in (0,1) $
and $ m_\mathcal{H} : (0, 1)^2 \to \mathbb{N} $
My doubt is regarding the $ \le $ in the above equation.
I have understood PAC learnability as
"If we choose a sample set $ S $ with $m$ samples such that $ m \ge m_\mathcal{H} (\epsilon, \delta) $, then $ \mathcal{H} $ is learnable with confidence $ 1- \delta $ and accuracy $ \epsilon $ "
I have understood the sample complexity as
" The minimal function $ m_\mathcal{H} (\epsilon, \delta) $ that gives the smallest integer for any $ \epsilon $ and $ \delta$ such that PAC learning is guaranteed "
Further, in the same book corollary 2.3 states
for PAC learnability,
$ m \ge \frac{ \log{\left(\frac{|\mathcal{H}|}{\delta}\right)} }{\epsilon} $
From the above, my understanding of PAC learning is choose a $\mathcal{m}$ that is bigger than $ \frac{ \log{\left(\frac{|\mathcal{H}|}{\delta}\right)} }{\epsilon} $ and also choose a $\mathcal{m}$ that is bigger than $ m_\mathcal{H} (\epsilon, \delta) $.
But, how does the relationship in Corollary 3.2 arrived?
What fails if $ m_\mathcal{H} (\epsilon, \delta) \ge \left \lceil \frac{ \log{\left(\frac{|\mathcal{H}|}{\delta}\right)} }{\epsilon} \right \rceil $ ?