mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

On the well-posedness of Bayesian inverse problems

arXiv 1902.10257 ↗First posted 26 Feb 2019math.ST cs.NA math.NAcited by 20

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The subject of this article is the introduction of a new concept of well-posedness of Bayesian inverse problems. The conventional concept of (Lipschitz, Hellinger) well-posedness in [Stuart 2010, Acta Numerica 19, pp. 451-559] is difficult to verify in practice and may be inappropriate in some contexts. Our concept simply replaces the Lipschitz continuity of the posterior measure in the Hellinger distance by continuity in an appropriate distance between probability measures. Aside from the Hellinger distance, we investigate well-posedness with respect to weak convergence, the total variation distance, the Wasserstein distance, and also the Kullback--Leibler divergence. We demonstrate that the weakening to continuity is tolerable and that the generalisation to other distances is important. The main results of this article are proofs of well-posedness with respect to some of the aforementioned distances for large classes of Bayesian inverse problems. Here, little or no information about the underlying model is necessary; making these results particularly interesting for practitioners using black-box models. We illustrate our findings with numerical examples motivated from machine learning and image processing.

Key facts. Cited by 20 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 26 Feb 2019.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 4; 2023: 7; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

20 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2021Bayesian imaging using Plug & Play priors: when Langevin meets Tweediecited by 97
  2. 2022Learned reconstruction methods with convergence guaranteescited by 46
  3. 2021Bayesian Imaging With Data-Driven Priors Encoded by Neural Networks: Theory, Methods, and Algorithmscited by 24
  4. 2023Adversarial robustness of amortized Bayesian inferencecited by 17
  5. 2022Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Gaussian Process Regression is Ill-Posedcited by 16
  6. 2023Conditional Generative Models are Provably Robust: Pointwise Guarantees for Bayesian Inverse Problemscited by 13
  7. 2022Bayesian Inversion for Nonlinear Imaging Models using Deep Generative Priorscited by 9
  8. 2023Learning from small data sets: Patch-based regularizers in inverse problems for image reconstructioncited by 9
  9. 2023Bayesian Posterior Perturbation Analysis with Integral Probability Metricscited by 7
  10. 2023Introduction To Gaussian Process Regression In Bayesian Inverse Problems, With New ResultsOn Experimental Design For Weighted Error Measurescited by 6
  11. 2021Deep Microlocal Reconstruction for Limited-Angle Tomographycited by 4
  12. 2023NF-ULA: Langevin Monte Carlo with Normalizing Flow Prior for Imaging Inverse Problemscited by 4
8 more
  1. 2024Gaussian Measures Conditioned on Nonlinear Observations: Consistency, MAP Estimators, and Simulationcited by 4
  2. 2026Error Analysis of Bayesian Inverse Problems with Generative Priorscited by 2
  3. 2024InVAErt networks for amortized inference and identifiability analysis of lumped parameter hemodynamic modelscited by 1
  4. 2022Further analysis of multilevel Stein variational gradient descent with an application to the Bayesian inference of glacier ice modelscited by 0
  5. 2023Applications of ML-Based Surrogates in Bayesian Approaches to Inverse Problemscited by 0
  6. 2025Solving Bayesian inverse problems with diffusion priors and off-policy RLcited by 0
  7. 2026Prediction Markets as Bayesian Inverse Problems: Uncertainty Quantification, Identifiability, and Information Gain from Price-Volume Histories under Latent Typescited by 0
  8. 2026Neural network surrogates with uncertainty quantification for inverse problems in partial differential equationscited by 0