Hardness of Maximum Likelihood Learning of DPPs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Determinantal Point Processes (DPPs) are a widely used probabilistic model for negatively correlated sets. DPPs have been successfully employed in Machine Learning applications to select a diverse, yet representative subset of data. In these applications, a set of parameters that maximize the likelihood of the data is typically desirable. The algorithms used for this task to date either optimize over a limited family of DPPs, or use local improvement heuristics that do not provide theoretical guarantees of optimality. In his seminal work on DPPs in Machine Learning, Kulesza (2011) conjectured that the problem is NP-complete. The lack of a formal proof prompted Brunel et al. (COLT 2017) to suggest that, in opposition to Kulesza's conjecture, there might exist a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a maximum-likelihood DPP. They also presented some preliminary evidence supporting a conjecture that they suggested might lead to such an algorithm. In this work we prove Kulesza's conjecture. In fact, we prove the following stronger hardness of approximation result: even computing a left(1-O(frac1log9N)right)-approximation to the maximum log-likelihood of a DPP on a ground set of N elements is NP-complete. From a technical perspective, we reduce the problem of approximating the maximum log-likelihood of a DPP to solving a gap instance of a textsc3-Coloring problem on a hypergraph. This hypergraph is based on the bounded-degree construction of Bogdanov et al. (FOCS 2002), which we enhance using the strong expanders of Alon and Capalbo (FOCS 2007). We demonstrate that if a rank-3 DPP achieves near-optimal log-likelihood, its marginal kernel must encode an almost perfect ``vector-coloring" of the hypergraph. Finally, we show that these continuous vectors can be decoded into a proper 3-coloring after removing a small fraction of ``noisy" edges.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 89 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 May 2022.
Builds on
23 of 89 references.
References · 23
- 2020Multi-Agent Determinantal Q-Learningcited by 36
- 2019Exact expressions for double descent and implicit regularization via surrogate random designcited by 35
- 2016Monte Carlo Markov Chain Algorithms for Sampling Strongly Rayleigh Distributions and Determinantal Point Processescited by 24
- 2021Probabilistic Generating Circuitscited by 24
- 2014Learning the Parameters of Determinantal Point Process Kernelscited by 21
- 2014Expectation-Maximization for Learning Determinantal Point Processescited by 19
- 2019Exact sampling of determinantal point processes with sublinear time preprocessingcited by 19
- 2016Fast DPP Sampling for Nystr"om with Application to Kernel Methodscited by 15
- 2019Learning Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processescited by 15
- 2015Fixed-point algorithms for learning determinantal point processescited by 13
- 2016Low-Rank Factorization of Determinantal Point Processes for Recommendationcited by 13
- 2014Computational Limits for Matrix Completioncited by 9
11 more
- 2018Reverse iterative volume sampling for linear regressioncited by 9
- 2014Large-Margin Determinantal Point Processescited by 8
- 2016Fast Mixing Markov Chains for Strongly Rayleigh Measures, DPPs, and Constrained Samplingcited by 8
- 2018Exact Sampling of Determinantal Point Processes without Eigendecompositioncited by 8
- 2016Learning Determinantal Point Processes in Sublinear Timecited by 7
- 2016Kronecker Determinantal Point Processescited by 5
- 2013Approximate Inference in Continuous Determinantal Point Processescited by 3
- 2015Fast Mixing for Discrete Point Processescited by 3
- 2020Wasserstein Learning of Determinantal Point Processescited by 2
- 2013Determinantal Clustering Processes - A Nonparametric Bayesian Approach to Kernel Based Semi-Supervised Clusteringcited by 1
- 2020Testing Determinantal Point Processescited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
3 papers.