mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Power of Preconditioning in Sparse Linear Regression

arXiv 2106.09207 ↗First posted 17 Jun 2021cs.LG cs.DS math.STcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse linear regression is a fundamental problem in high-dimensional statistics, but strikingly little is known about how to efficiently solve it without restrictive conditions on the design matrix. We consider the (correlated) random design setting, where the covariates are independently drawn from a multivariate Gaussian N(0,Sigma) with Sigma : n × n, and seek estimators hatw minimizing (hatw-w^*)TSigma(hatw-w^*), where w^* is the k-sparse ground truth. Information theoretically, one can achieve strong error bounds with O(k log n) samples for arbitrary Sigma and w^*; however, no efficient algorithms are known to match these guarantees even with o(n) samples, without further assumptions on Sigma or w^*. As far as hardness, computational lower bounds are only known with worst-case design matrices. Random-design instances are known which are hard for the Lasso, but these instances can generally be solved by Lasso after a simple change-of-basis (i.e. preconditioning). In this work, we give upper and lower bounds clarifying the power of preconditioning in sparse linear regression. First, we show that the preconditioned Lasso can solve a large class of sparse linear regression problems nearly optimally: it succeeds whenever the dependency structure of the covariates, in the sense of the Markov property, has low treewidth -- even if Sigma is highly ill-conditioned. Second, we construct (for the first time) random-design instances which are provably hard for an optimally preconditioned Lasso. In fact, we complete our treewidth classification by proving that for any treewidth-t graph, there exists a Gaussian Markov Random Field on this graph such that the preconditioned Lasso, with any choice of preconditioner, requires Omega(t1/20) samples to recover O(log n)-sparse signals when covariates are drawn from this model.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 91 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2021.

Builds on

13 of 91 references.

References · 13

  1. 2015Best Subset Selection via a Modern Optimization Lenscited by 99
  2. 2014On Iterative Hard Thresholding Methods for High-dimensional M-Estimationcited by 53
  3. 2016Restricted Strong Convexity Implies Weak Submodularitycited by 51
  4. 2014Learning without Concentrationcited by 50
  5. 2020Reducibility and Statistical-Computational Gaps from Secret Leakagecited by 50
  6. 2020A Nearly-Linear Time Algorithm for Linear Programs with Small Treewidth: A Multiscale Representation of Robust Central Pathcited by 29
  7. 2019Learning Some Popular Gaussian Graphical Models without Condition Number Boundscited by 20
  8. 2018Gradient Descent for One-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks: Polynomial Convergence and SQ Lower Boundscited by 18
  9. 2014On the Prediction Performance of the Lassocited by 12
  10. 2015Optimal prediction for sparse linear models? Lower bounds for coordinate-separable M-estimatorscited by 9
  11. 2016Structured Sparse Regression via Greedy Hard-Thresholdingcited by 6
  12. 2017Sparse High-Dimensional Linear Regression. Algorithmic Barriers and a Local Search Algorithmcited by 4
1 more
  1. 2013Polynomial Bounds for the Grid-Minor Theoremcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

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

15 papers.

Sort: