arXiv reader

The Geometry and Well-Posedness of Sparse Regularized Linear Regression

Jasper Marijn Everink, Yiqiu Dong and Martin Skovgaard Andersen

arXiv
2409.03461v1 · PDF · 5 September 2024
Categories
math.ST, math.OC, stat.TH
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

In this work, we study the well-posedness of certain sparse regularized linear regression problems, i.e., the existence, uniqueness and continuity of the solution map with respect to the data. We focus on regularization functions that are convex piecewise linear, i.e., whose epigraph is polyhedral. This includes total variation on graphs and polyhedral constraints. We provide a geometric framework for these functions based on their connection to polyhedral sets and apply this to the study of the well-posedness of the corresponding sparse regularized linear regression problem. Particularly, we provide geometric conditions for well-posedness of the regression problem, compare these conditions to those for smooth regularization, and show the computational difficulty of verifying these conditions.

Items 54

Theorem

Theorem 1.1 (Necessary and sufficient conditions for well-posedness)

RGPR

Let A\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} be a linear operator and f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function, i.e., f(\bm{x}) = \max_{i = 1, \dots k}\{\bm{v}_i^T\bm{x} + w_i\} + \chi_{\mathbf{P}}(\bm{x}) with \bm{v}_i \in \mathbb{R}^n, w_i \in \mathbb{R}, \mathbf{P} a polyhedral set and \chi_{\mathbf{P}}(\bm{x}) is zero if \bm{x} \in \mathbf{P} and infinite otherwise. Furthermore, assume that \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n, where \operatorname{dom}(f) is the effective domain of f, i.e., the points \bm{x} in the domain for which f(\bm{x}) is finite. Then, the sparse regularized linear least squares problem

\operatorname*{argmin}_{\bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\|A\bm{x} - \bm{b}\|_2^2 + f(\bm{x})\right\},

is well-posed if and only if \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f(\bm{x}) \neq \emptyset for \bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n implies that \dim(\partial f(\bm{x})) \geq \operatorname{nullity}(A), where \operatorname{row}(A) is the row space of A, \operatorname{nullity}(A) is the dimension of the null space of A and \partial f(\bm{x}) is the subdifferential of f at \bm{x}.

Definition

Definition 1 (convex piecewise linear function)

SHLZ

A function f: \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} is called convex piecewise linear if any of the following equivalent conditions hold:

    40 the epigraph \operatorname{epi}(f):= \{(\bm{x}, t) \in \mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R} \,|\, f(\bm{x}) \leq t \} is a polyhedral set. 40 the domain of f is a polyhedral set and it is the maximum over finitely many affine functions, i.e., f(\bm{x}) = \max_{i = 1, \dots k}\{\bm{v}_i^T\bm{x} + w_i\} + \chi_{\mathbf{P}}(\bm{x}) with \bm{v}_i \in \mathbb{R}^n, w_i \in \mathbb{R}, \mathbf{P} a polyhedral set. 40 f is convex and the domain of f can be covered by finitely many polyhedral sets, such that the restriction of f to any of these polyhedral sets is an affine function.

Definition

Definition 2 (polyhedral complex)

2OE9

We call a set \mathcal{E} \subset \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{R}^n), where \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{R}^n) denotes the power-set of \mathbb{R}^n, a polyhedral complex if the following holds:

    40 All \mathbf{E} \in \mathcal{E} are polyhedral. 40 If \mathbf{F} is a non-empty face of \mathbf{E} \in \mathcal{E}, then \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{E}. 40 If \mathbf{E}, \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{E} have common intersection, then \mathbf{E} \cap \mathbf{F} is a face of both \mathbf{E} and \mathbf{F}.

Note that compared to the conventional definition of a polyhedral complex, we do not require the empty set to be in \mathcal{E}.

Used by Definition 5
Definition

Definition 3 (primal complex)

ZJG4

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Define the lower faces of the epigraph of f as

\bar{\mathcal{F}}_f := \{\mathbf{F}\ \,\text{\normalfont is a face of}\ \operatorname{epi}(f)\,|\, \mathbf{F} \neq \emptyset\ \,\text{\normalfont and}\ \dim(\mathbf{F}) \neq n + 1\}.

Let P : \mathbb{R}^{n+1} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n be the linear projection map P(\bm{x}, \bm{t}) = \bm{x} and define the primal complex of f as

\mathcal{F}_f := P\bar{\mathcal{F}}_f = \{P\bar{\mathbf{F}}\,|\, \bar{\mathbf{F}} \in \bar{\mathcal{F}}_f\}.
Proposition

Proposition 1 (constant subdifferential)

GBCP

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Each polyhedral set \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f can be characterized as follows. Let \bm{x} \in \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}) be arbitrary, then the relative interior \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}) consists precisely of all \bm{y}\in \mathbb{R}^n for which \partial f(\bm{x}) = \partial f(\bm{y}).

The constant subdifferential corresponding to \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}) will be denoted by \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}.

Proof

Proof Proof

YA94

Consider the polyhedral set \operatorname{epi}(f). The interior of each face of \operatorname{epi}(f) is characterized by its normal cone. Furthermore, the normal cone of a lower face of \operatorname{epi}(f) characterizes the subdifferential of f at the interior of the face projected back onto coordinate space. \square

Definition

Definition 4 (dual complex)

65C2

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Define the corresponding dual complex as

\mathcal{F}_f^\star := \{\partial f_\mathbf{F}\,|\, \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f\} = \{\partial f(\bm{x})\,|\, \bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n\}.
Lemma

Lemma 1

ZZV6

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Let \mathbf{F}, \mathbf{H} \in \mathcal{F}_f with corresponding \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}, \partial f_{\mathbf{H}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star, then \mathbf{F} is a face of \mathbf{H} if and only if \partial f_\mathbf{H} is a face of \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}.

Used by Proof Proof
Proposition

Proposition 2 (Duality of complexes)

WE1Z

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Then,

\left(\mathcal{F}_{f^\star}, \mathcal{F}_{f^\star}^\star\right) = \left(\mathcal{F}_f^\star, \mathcal{F}_f\right).
Proof

Proof Proof

BBXT

Let g = f^\star, then g^\star = f by f being closed and the Fenchel-Moreau theorem [bauschke2011convex, Corollary 13.38]. Therefore, \mathcal{F}_f^\star = \mathcal{F}_{f^\star} is equivalent to \mathcal{F}_{g^\star}^\star = \mathcal{F}_g. Thus, we only need to prove \mathcal{F}_{f^\star}^\star = \mathcal{F}_{f} for any convex piecewise linear function f.

A fundamental property of proper, closed, convex functions is the equivalence of the Fenchel-Young inequality [bauschke2011convex, Proposition 16.10], i.e., if \bm{x} \in \operatorname{dom}(f) and \bm{y} \in \operatorname{dom}(f^\star), then

\bm{y} \in \partial f(\bm{x}) \,\text{\normalfont if and only if }\bm{x} \in \partial f^\star(\bm{y}).

Let \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f and \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star. We need to show that for all \bm{y} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}, we have \partial f^\star(\bm{y}) = \mathbf{F}.

Let \bm{y} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} and \bm{x} \in \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}), then \bm{y} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} = \partial f(\bm{x}), thus \bm{x} \in \partial f^\star(\bm{y}), hence \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}) \subseteq \partial f^\star(\bm{y}). Because the subdifferential is a closed set we get \mathbf{F} \subseteq \partial f^\star(\bm{y}).

Let \bm{x} \in \mathbf{F} but \bm{x} \not\in \partial f^\star(\bm{y}). Then \bm{y} \not\in \partial f(\bm{x}). But by assumption \bm{y} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \subseteq \partial f(\bm{x}), which is a contradiction. \square

Lemma

Lemma 2

FSW7

Let f : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Let \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f with corresponding \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star, then the following holds:

    40 \dim(\mathbf{F}) + \dim(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) = n . 40 \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \bot \mathbf{F}, i.e., (\partial f_{\mathbf{F}} - \partial f_{\mathbf{F}})^T(\mathbf{F} - \mathbf{F}) = \{\bm{0}\}. 40 \mathbf{F} + \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}^\bot \in \operatorname{aff}(\mathbf{F}).

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

JBER

(?) Follows from the normal cone construction.

(?) Let \bm{x}, \bm{x}' \in \mathbf{F} and \bm{y}, \bm{y}' \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}, then

(\bm{y} - \bm{y}')^T(\bm{x} - \bm{x}') = \bm{y}^T\bm{x} + \bm{y}'^T\bm{x}' - \bm{y}'^T\bm{x} - \bm{y}^T\bm{x}'.

By conjugacy, \bm{y}^T\bm{x} = f^\star(\bm{y}) + f(\bm{x}) and similarly for the other terms. All thee terms will cancel out resulting in

(\bm{y} - \bm{y}')^T(\bm{x} - \bm{x}') = \bm{0}.

(?) Follows from properties ? and ?.

\square

Uses Lemma 2
Proposition

Proposition 3

296D

The vertices of the polytope \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} are the vectors \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} = \sum_{\{v_i, v_j\} \in \mathbf{E}} u_{i,j}\bm{d}_{i,j} with \bm{u} \in \{-1,1\}^{\#\mathbf{E}} such that the associated directed graph is acyclic.

Proof

Proof Proof

WDOB

Let \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} such that the associated directed graph is cyclic. Because \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} \in \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G}, there must exists \bm{x} such that \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} \in \partial \text{TV}_G (\bm{x}), more specifically, the values in \bm{x} must strictly increase over any directed link in the directed graph. Because the directed graph is cyclic, this results in a contradiction, hence the directed graph associated to \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} is acyclic.

Let \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} such that the associated directed graph is acyclic. Construct \bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^{\#\mathbf{V}} inductively as follows. For each node i with no in-going links, let x_i = 0. For all other nodes j, let x_j be the one larger than the maximum over the x_i from incoming nodes. By construction, \text{TV}_G is differentiable at \bm{x} with gradient \bm{z}_{\bm{u}}, hence \bm{z}_{\bm{u}} is a vertex of the polytope \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G}. \square

Corollary

Corollary 1

S56H

An undirected graph G is a tree, i.e., the graph does not have cycles, if and only if, the vertices of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} are all the vectors of the form \sum_{\{v_i, v_j\} \in \mathbf{E}}u_{i,j}\bm{d}_{i,j} with \bm{u} \in \{-1,1\}^{\#\mathbf{E}}.

Proposition

Proposition 4

NAQ1

The vertices of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} - \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{\#\mathbf{V}} and \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} are the same.

Proof

Proof Proof

NLDM

If \bm{v} be a vertex of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} that is not a vertex of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} - \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{\#\mathbf{V}}, then \bm{v} can be written as a convex combination of the other vertices of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} plus a non-zero vector \bm{p} from the cone -\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{\#\mathbf{V}}. However, every vector \bm{x} \in \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} satisfies \bm{1}^T\bm{x} = 0, but \bm{1}^T\bm{v} = \bm{1}^T\bm{p} < 0, a contradiction. Thus every vertex of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} is a vertex of \mathbf{P}_{\text{TV}_G} - \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{\#\mathbf{V}}.

For the converse, note that vertices of the Minkowski sum of a polytope and a polyhedral cone are all vertices of the polytope. \square

Definition

Definition 5 (level set complex)

697D

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. For every c \in \mathbb{R}, define the level set \mathcal{L}_f(c) as the polyhedral complex corresponding to the level set \{\bm{x}\in \mathbb{R}^n\,|\, f(\bm{x}) = c\}.

Uses Definition 2 · Used by Proof Proof
Lemma

Lemma 3

HFFU

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. If \mathbf{L} \in \mathcal{L}_f(c) for some c\in\mathbb{R} and \bm{x} \in \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{L}) and \bm{x} \in \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}, then \mathbf{L} \subseteq \mathbf{F}.

Proof

Proof Proof

90CB

Follows from the fact that the level set complex is part of the boundary of a polyhedral sublevel set of the epigraph. \square

Lemma

Lemma 4 (Subdifferential orthogonal to level set)

0FY5

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. For every \mathbf{L} \in \mathcal{L}_f(c) with c\in\mathbb{R}, let \bm{x}\in\operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{L}), then \partial f(\bm{x})\bot \mathbf{L}, i.e., \partial f(\bm{x})^T(\mathbf{L}-\mathbf{L}) = \{\bm{0}\}.

Particularly, \mathbf{L} + \partial f(\bm{x})^\bot \in \operatorname{aff}(\mathbf{L}).

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

N70L

Let \bm{y}\in \partial f(\bm{x}) and \bm{v}, \bm{w} \in \mathbf{L}, then by conjugacy, and \mathbf{L} being a level set,

\bm{y}^T(\bm{v} - \bm{w}) = f^\star(\bm{y}) - f^\star(\bm{y}) + f(\bm{v}) - f(\bm{w}) = \bm{0}.

\square

Lemma

Lemma 5

9SPH

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear. Let \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star. If \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) - \operatorname{rank}(A) = k > 0 then \dim(\operatorname{Null}(A) \cap \partial f_\mathbf{F}^\bot) = k.

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

5MFK

We have \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) - \operatorname{rank}(A) = k if and only if \dim(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}^\bot) + \dim(\operatorname{Null}(A)) = n + k. Thus, because n + k > n, we get \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}^\bot and \operatorname{Null}(A) have a space of dimension k in common. \square

Proposition

Proposition 5

6M6A

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear, A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} and \bm{x} \in \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f with \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) - \operatorname{rank}(A) = k > 0. Then there exists \mathbf{L} \in \mathcal{L}_f(f(\bm{x})) and a polyhedral set \mathbf{S} \subseteq \mathbf{L} \subseteq \mathbf{F} for which \bm{x} \in \mathbf{S}, \dim(\mathbf{S}) = k and \mathbf{S} - \mathbf{S} \subseteq \operatorname{Null}(A).

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

GBUZ

Let \mathbf{L} \in \mathcal{L}_f(f(\bm{x})) such that \bm{x} \in \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{L}). If \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) - \operatorname{rank}(A) = k > 0, then by Lemma 5 and 4, the set \mathbf{S} = \left[\bm{x} + \operatorname{Null}(A) \cap \partial f_\mathbf{F}^\bot \right] \cap \mathbf{L} suffices. \square

Proposition

Proposition 6

HY1A

Let f: \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be convex piecewise linear such that \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n and A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}. If there exist distinct \bm{x}, \bm{y} \in \mathbb{R}^n such that \bm{x} - \bm{y} \in \operatorname{Null}(A) and \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f(\bm{x}) \cap \partial f(\bm{y}) \neq \emptyset, then there exist \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f such that \bm{x},\bm{y}\in \mathbf{F} and \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) > \operatorname{rank}(A).

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

SAR5

Let \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star be the smallest face of \partial f(\bm{x}) \cap \partial f(\bm{y}) such that \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset. Then by Lemma 1, \bm{x},\bm{y}\in \mathbf{F}. If \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) > \operatorname{rank}(A), we are done. So assume that \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A), or equivalently \dim(\mathbf{F}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A), then,

\dim(A(\mathbf{F}-\mathbf{F})) < \dim(\mathbf{F}-\mathbf{F}) = \dim(\mathbf{F}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A).

Thus, the strict inclusion A(\mathbf{F}-\mathbf{F}) \subset \operatorname{col}(A), equivalently \operatorname{Null}(A^T) \subset (A(\mathbf{F}-\mathbf{F}))^\bot holds. Therefore, there exists \bm{d} \in \mathbb{R}^m such that A^T\bm{d} \neq \bm{0} and (\mathbf{F}-\mathbf{F})^TA^T\bm{d} = \{\bm{0}\}, hence \bm{0} \neq A^T\bm{d} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}^\bot.

By assumption, there also exists \bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^m such that A^T\bm{z} \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}. Now consider the line A^T\bm{z} + tA^T\bm{d} for t\in \mathbb{R}^n. By construction, this line is contained in \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}. However, by the assumption that \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n, \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} cannot contain a line, hence \operatorname{row}(A) must intersect a face of \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}, which is a contradiction. \square

Uses Lemma 1
Definition

Definition 6 (Smooth data fidelity)

S3FE

We call D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} a smooth data fidelity function if the following conditions hold:

    40 The map \bm{z} \mapsto D(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) is strictly convex and differentiable for all \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m, 40 The map \bm{b} \mapsto \nabla_{\bm{z}} D(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) : \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m is bijective for all \bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^m,

where \nabla_{\bm{z}} D denotes the gradient of D with respect to the first variable.

Proposition

Proposition 7

4XQI

Consider the Bregman divergence associated to a continuously differentiable convex function \phi: \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R}, i.e., D_\phi(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) = \phi(\bm{z}) - \phi(\bm{b}) - \nabla \phi(\bm{b})^T(\bm{z} - \bm{b}). Assume that \phi is strictly convex and \operatorname{range}(\nabla \phi) = \mathbb{R}^m, then D_\phi is a smooth data fidelity function.

Proof

Proof Proof

TVE9

The Bregman divergence is always convex in its first argument. The gradient of the Bregman divergence with respect to the first argument is

\nabla_{\bm{z}}D_\phi(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) = \nabla \phi(\bm{z}) - \nabla \phi(\bm{b}),

with, for fixed \bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^m, the inverse map

\bm{v} \mapsto [\nabla \phi]^{-1}(\nabla \phi(\bm{z}) - \bm{v}).

\square

Proposition

Proposition 8

5YK8

Let \psi : \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be differentiable and strictly convex such that \nabla \psi : \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m is bijective, then D(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) = \psi(\bm{z} - \bm{b}) is a smooth data fidelity function.

Definition

Definition 7 (solution map)

Q8P2

Let D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be any function, A\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} be a linear operator and f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a proper convex lower semi-continuous function. Define the corresponding solution map \mathbf{S}^D_{A,f} : \mathbb{R}^{m} \rightarrow \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{R}^n) by

\mathbf{S}^D_{A,f}(\bm{b}) := \operatorname*{argmin}_{\bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n} \left\{D(A\bm{x},\bm{b}) + f(\bm{x})\right\}.
Lemma

Lemma 6 (range condition for general regularization)

PBH5

Let f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a proper convex lower semi-continuous function and D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} a smooth data fidelity function. Then,

\bm{x} \in \operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}^D_{A,f}) \quad \,\text{\normalfont if and only if} \quad \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f(\bm{x}) \neq \emptyset.
Uses Definition 6 · Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

QOQ8

We have that \bm{x} \in \mathbf{S}^D_{A, f}(\bm{b}) if and only if -A^T \nabla_{\bm{z}} D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{x}). Thus, if there exists a \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m for which \bm{x} \in \mathbf{S}^D_{A, f}(\bm{b}), then -A^T \nabla_{\bm{z}} D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f(\bm{x}). For the converse, let \bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^m such that A^T\bm{z} \in \partial f(\bm{x}). Choose b = [\nabla_{\bm{z}} D(A\bm{x}, \cdot)]^{-1}(-\bm{z}), then -A^T \nabla_{\bm{z}} D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{x}). \square

Proposition

Proposition 9 (range condition for convex piecewise linear regularization)

TS9M

Let f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function and D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} a smooth data fidelity function. For any \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f we have

\mathbf{F} \subseteq \operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}^D_{A,f}) \quad \,\text{\normalfont if and only if} \quad \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset.
Proof

Proof Proof

X213

By Lemma 6, \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset if and only if \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{F}) \subseteq \operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}_{A,f}). If \mathbf{H} \in \mathcal{F}_f is a face of \mathbf{F}, then by duality also \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{H}} \supseteq \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset. Therefore, also \operatorname{relint}(\mathbf{H}) \subseteq \operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}_{A,f}). Because \mathbf{F} is the union of the relative interiors of all of its faces, we obtain \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset if and only if F \subseteq \operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}_{A,f}). \square

Uses Lemma 6
Corollary

Corollary 2 (range of solution set)

Z9UJ

Let f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function and D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} a smooth data fidelity function. Then, there exists a polyhedral subcomplex \mathcal{E} \subseteq \mathcal{F}_f, such that

\operatorname{range}(\mathbf{S}^D_{A, f}) = \bigcup_{\mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{E}}\mathbf{F}.
Lemma

Lemma 7

E8E4

Let f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a proper convex lower semi-continuous function and let D: \mathbb{R}^m\times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be strictly convex in its first argument. For every \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m, if \bm{x}, \bm{y} \in \mathbf{S}^D_{A,f}(\bm{b}), then A\bm{x} = A\bm{y} and f(\bm{x}) = f(\bm{y}).

Used by Proof Proof
Proof

Proof Proof

TVGI

Assume that \bm{x} \neq \bm{y} and A\bm{x}\neq A\bm{y}. By strict convexity of D(\cdot, \bm{b}) we have that for \bm{z} = \frac{1}{2}(\bm{x} + \bm{y}),

D(\bm{z}, \bm{b}) + f(\bm{z}) < \frac{1}{2}\left[D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) + f(\bm{x}) + D(A\bm{y}, \bm{b}) + f(\bm{y})\right] = \min_{\bm{v}\in\mathbb{R}^n}\left\{D(A\bm{v}, \bm{b}) + f(\bm{v}) \right\}.

This contradicts \bm{x}, \bm{y} \in \mathbf{S}^D_{A, f}(\bm{b}).

Because \bm{x}, \bm{y} \in \mathbf{S}^D_{A, f}(\bm{b}) and A\bm{x} = A\bm{y}, we get f(\bm{x}) = f(\bm{y}). \square

Theorem

Theorem 3.1

BF8M

(Necessary condition for uniqueness) Let D:\mathbb{R}^m\times\mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be arbitrary. If there exist \bm{x} \in \mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b}) for some \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m and let \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f containing \bm{x} such that \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) - \operatorname{rank}(A) = k > 0, then \dim(\mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b})) \geq k.

Thus, if \#[\mathbf{F} \cap \mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b})] \leq 1 for all \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m and \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f, then \#[\mathbf{F} \cap \mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b})] = 1 must imply \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A).

Theorem

Theorem 3.2 (sufficient condition for uniqueness)

B35T

Let D: \mathbb{R}^m\times\mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be strictly convex and differentiable in its first argument and \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n. If \#\mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b}) > 1 for some \bm{b} \in \mathbb{R}^m, then there exists \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f such that \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} and \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) > \operatorname{rank}(A).

Proof

Proof Proof

9R3Z

Let \bm{x}, \bm{y} \in \mathbf{S}_{A, f}^{D}(\bm{b}) distinct, then by Lemma 7 A\bm{x} = A\bm{y}. Furthermore, by optimality we get

-A^T\nabla_{\bm{z}}D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{x}) \quad \text{and} \quad -A^T\nabla_{\bm{z}}D(A\bm{y}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{y}).

Therefore,

-A^T\nabla_{\bm{z}}D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{x}) \quad \text{and} \quad -A^T\nabla_{\bm{z}}D(A\bm{x}, \bm{b}) \in \partial f(\bm{y}),

hence \operatorname{row}(A)\cap \partial f(\bm{x}) \cap \partial f(\bm{y}) \neq \emptyset. The conclusion follows directly from Proposition 6. \square

Corollary

Corollary 3 (Necessary and sufficient conditions for uniqueness)

4O5F

Let D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be a smooth data fidelity function, A\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} be a linear operator and f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function. If \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n, then \#\mathbf{S}_{A,f}^D(\bm{b}) = 1 for all \bm{b}\in\mathbb{R}^m if and only if \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset implies \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A). That is, every accessible set \mathbf{F} must satisfy \operatorname{codim}(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}}) \leq \operatorname{rank}(A).

Lemma

Lemma 8 (uniqueness implies piecewise linear)

TODR

Let D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be D(\bm{x}, \bm{y}) = \frac12\|\bm{x} - \bm{y}\|^2_{\Sigma}, A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} be a linear operator and f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function. If \mathbf{S}^D_{A, f} is single-valued, then for all \mathbf{F} \in \mathcal{F}_f, the inverse image [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}) is closed and convex and the restricted solution map S^D_{A, f}\big|_{[S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F})} is affine.

Proof

Proof Proof

QYKX

Let \bm{\alpha},\bm{\beta} \in [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}) such that \bm{x} = S^D_{A,f}(\bm{\alpha}) \in \mathbf{F} and \bm{y} = S_{A,f}(\bm{\beta}) \in \mathbf{F}. Then,

A^T\Sigma(\bm{\alpha} - A\bm{x}) \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}\quad \text{and} \quad A^T\Sigma(\bm{\beta} - A\bm{y}) \in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}.

Let \lambda \in [0, 1], then by convexity of \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} we obtain,

A^T\Sigma([\lambda\bm{\alpha} + (1-\lambda)\bm{\beta}] - A[\lambda\bm{x} + (1-\lambda)\bm{y}])\in \partial f_{\mathbf{F}}.

Thus, for all \alpha,\beta \in [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}) and \lambda \in [0,1], we have

S_{A, f}(\lambda\bm{\alpha} + (1-\lambda)\bm{\beta}) = \lambda S_{A,f}(\bm{\alpha}) + (1-\lambda)S_{A,f}(\bm{\beta}),

therefore, S_{A,f}(\mathbf{F}) is convex and [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}\big|_{[S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F})} is affine. Because [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}\big|_{[S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F})} is continuous and \mathbf{F} is closed, the set [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}) is closed. \square

Theorem

Theorem 3.3 (uniqueness implies continuity)

R328

Let D : \mathbb{R}^m \times \mathbb{R}^m \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be D(\bm{x}, \bm{y}) = \|\bm{x} - \bm{y}\|^2_{\Sigma}, A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} be a linear operator and f:\mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function. If \mathbf{S}_{A, f} is single-valued, then S_{A,f} is continuous.

Proof

Proof Proof

AMKQ

By Corollary 2, there exists a polyhedral subcomplex \mathcal{E} \subseteq \mathcal{F}_f such that \operatorname{range}(S_{A, f}) = \bigcup_{\mathbf{F}\in \mathcal{E}}\mathbf{F}. Due to Lemma 8, the domain of S_{A,f} can be covered by closed sets, i.e., \operatorname{dom}(S_{A, f}) = \mathbb{R}^m = \bigcup_{\mathbf{F}\in \mathcal{E}}[S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}). The solution map S_{A, f} restricted to each closed covering element [S^D_{A,f}]^{-1}(\mathbf{F}) is affine, hence continuous. Because the function coincided on the intersection of the covering elements, the continuity of S_{A,f} follows from the pasting lemma [Munkres2014topology, Theorem 18.3]. \square

Theorem

Theorem 4.1

WQ2A

Let f : \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \cup \{\infty\} be a convex piecewise linear function with \dim(\operatorname{dom}(f)) = n and p be the dimension of the smallest subdifferential \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^{\star} that contains the zero vector. If A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n} with m \geq p is a continuously distributed random matrix, then the linear least squares problem for A regularized by f is almost surely well-posed.

Proposition

Proposition 10

7UHE

For any B\in \mathbb{R}^{k\times n} and \bm{y} \in \mathbb{R}^{k}, there exists A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} and f(\bm{x}) = \chi_{\|\cdot\|_\infty \leq 1}(\bm{x}) - \bm{v}^T\bm{x} for some \bm{v} \in \mathbb{R}^n, such that the l_0 minimization problem

\min_{\bm{z}}\{\|\bm{z}\|_0 \,|\, B\bm{z} = \bm{y}\},

is equivalent to

\min_{\mathbf{F}}\{\dim(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}})\,|\, \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star \text{ and } \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset\}.

Similarly, the nonnegative l_0 minimization problem

\min_{\bm{z}}\{\|\bm{z}\|_0 \,|\, B\bm{z} = \bm{y} \text{ and } \bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^{n}_{\geq 0}\},

can be transformed into (10) for f(\bm{x}) = \chi_{\bm{v} - \mathbb{R}^{n}_{\geq 0}}(\bm{x}) - \bm{v}^T\bm{x} for some \bm{v} \in \mathbb{R}^n.

Proof

Proof Proof

MBLK

Let B\in \mathbb{R}^{k\times n} and \bm{y} \in \mathbb{R}^k. Let \bm{v} \in \mathbb{R}^n satisfy B\bm{v} = \bm{y} and define \bm{z} = \bm{x} - \bm{v}, then (10) is equivalent to

\min_{\bm{x}}\{\|\bm{x} - \bm{v}\|_0 \,|\, B\bm{x} = \bm{0}\}.

Now, let A be a matrix such that \operatorname{row}(A) = \operatorname{Null}(B), then B\bm{x} = 0 is equivalent to \bm{x} \in \operatorname{row}(A). Furthermore, note that \|\bm{x} - \bm{v}\|_0 = \dim(\partial f(\bm{y})) when f(\bm{x}) = \chi_{\|\cdot\|_\infty \leq 1}(\bm{x}) - \bm{v}^T\bm{x} and \bm{x} \in \partial f(\bm{y}). Thus, for these A and f, problem (Proof) is equivalent to,

\min_{\bm{x}}\{\dim(\partial f(\bm{y}))\,|\, \bm{x} \in \partial f(\bm{y})\text{ and }\bm{x} \in \operatorname{row}(A)\},

which is equivalent to (10).

The argument for nonnegative l_0 minimization is similar. \square

Corollary

Corollary 4

5ZZE

Solving

\min\{\dim(\partial f_{\mathbf{F}})\,|\, \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \in \mathcal{F}_f^\star \text{ and } \operatorname{row}(A) \cap \partial f_{\mathbf{F}} \neq \emptyset\},

for convex piecewise linear functions f is NP-hard.

Theorem

Theorem 4.2

JPPZ

Let f_n(\bm{x}) be either \gamma \|\bm{x}\|_1, \gamma \|D_n\bm{x}\|_1 or \gamma \|D_n\bm{x}\|_1 + \chi_{\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^n} with finite difference matrix D_{n} \in \mathbb{R}^{(n-1)\times n} and \gamma > 0. Then, verifying well-posedness of A\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n} with respect to f_n(\bm{x}) is co-NP-hard.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2409.03461v1 by Jasper Marijn Everink, Yiqiu Dong and Martin Skovgaard Andersen, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2409/2409.03461.jsonl.