mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Distributional Hardness Against Preconditioned Lasso via Erasure-Robust Designs

arXiv 2203.02824 ↗First posted 5 Mar 2022cs.DS cs.IT cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Sparse linear regression with ill-conditioned Gaussian random designs is widely believed to exhibit a statistical/computational gap, but there is surprisingly little formal evidence for this belief, even in the form of examples that are hard for restricted classes of algorithms. Recent work has shown that, for certain covariance matrices, the broad class of Preconditioned Lasso programs provably cannot succeed on polylogarithmically sparse signals with a sublinear number of samples. However, this lower bound only shows that for every preconditioner, there exists at least one signal that it fails to recover successfully. This leaves open the possibility that, for example, trying multiple different preconditioners solves every sparse linear regression problem. In this work, we prove a stronger lower bound that overcomes this issue. For an appropriate covariance matrix, we construct a single signal distribution on which any invertibly-preconditioned Lasso program fails with high probability, unless it receives a linear number of samples. Surprisingly, at the heart of our lower bound is a new positive result in compressed sensing. We show that standard sparse random designs are with high probability robust to adversarial measurement erasures, in the sense that if b measurements are erased, then all but O(b) of the coordinates of the signal are still information-theoretically identifiable. To our knowledge, this is the first time that partial recoverability of arbitrary sparse signals under erasures has been studied in compressed sensing.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2022.

Builds on

20 of 51 references.

References · 20

  1. 2016Statistical Query Lower Bounds for Robust Estimation of High-dimensional Gaussians and Gaussian Mixturescited by 114
  2. 2018Efficient Algorithms and Lower Bounds for Robust Linear Regressioncited by 76
  3. 2020Superpolynomial Lower Bounds for Learning One-Layer Neural Networks using Gradient Descentcited by 57
  4. 2020Reducibility and Statistical-Computational Gaps from Secret Leakagecited by 50
  5. 2020Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradientscited by 50
  6. 2018Reducibility and Computational Lower Bounds for Problems with Planted Sparse Structurecited by 35
  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. 2021On the Power of Preconditioning in Sparse Linear Regressioncited by 15
  10. 2019Universality of Computational Lower Bounds for Submatrix Detectioncited by 13
  11. 2014On the Prediction Performance of the Lassocited by 12
  12. 2015Sum-of-squares lower bounds for planted cliquecited by 12
8 more
  1. 2017High-Dimensional Regression with Binary Coefficients. Estimating Squared Error and a Phase Transitioncited by 12
  2. 2021The Fine-Grained Hardness of Sparse Linear Regressioncited by 12
  3. 2020Statistical Query Lower Bounds for Tensor PCAcited by 11
  4. 2015Sum-of-Squares Lower Bounds for Sparse PCAcited by 10
  5. 2016Average-case Hardness of RIP Certificationcited by 10
  6. 2015Optimal prediction for sparse linear models? Lower bounds for coordinate-separable M-estimatorscited by 9
  7. 2016Approximate Sparse Linear Regressioncited by 8
  8. 2013On partial sparse recoverycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2.

2 papers.