The Star Geometry of Critic-Based Regularizer Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Variational regularization is a classical technique to solve statistical inference tasks and inverse problems, with modern data-driven approaches parameterizing regularizers via deep neural networks showcasing impressive empirical performance. Recent works along these lines learn task-dependent regularizers. This is done by integrating information about the measurements and ground-truth data in an unsupervised, critic-based loss function, where the regularizer attributes low values to likely data and high values to unlikely data. However, there is little theory about the structure of regularizers learned via this process and how it relates to the two data distributions. To make progress on this challenge, we initiate a study of optimizing critic-based loss functions to learn regularizers over a particular family of regularizers: gauges (or Minkowski functionals) of star-shaped bodies. This family contains regularizers that are commonly employed in practice and shares properties with regularizers parameterized by deep neural networks. We specifically investigate critic-based losses derived from variational representations of statistical distances between probability measures. By leveraging tools from star geometry and dual Brunn-Minkowski theory, we illustrate how these losses can be interpreted as dual mixed volumes that depend on the data distribution. This allows us to derive exact expressions for the optimal regularizer in certain cases. Finally, we identify which neural network architectures give rise to such star body gauges and when do such regularizers have favorable properties for optimization. More broadly, this work highlights how the tools of star geometry can aid in understanding the geometry of unsupervised regularizer learning.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 46 of its 93 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Aug 2024.
Builds on
46 of 93 references.
References · 46
- 2022Diffusion Posterior Sampling for General Noisy Inverse Problemscited by 1,375
- 2018Invertible Residual Networkscited by 364
- 2017Compressed Sensing using Generative Modelscited by 337
- 2016The Little Engine that Could: Regularization by Denoising (RED)cited by 303
- 2020Deep Learning Techniques for Inverse Problems in Imagingcited by 290
- 2021Robust Compressed Sensing MRI with Deep Generative Priorscited by 284
- 2018Stochastic model-based minimization of weakly convex functionscited by 157
- 2023Solving Linear Inverse Problems Provably via Posterior Sampling with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 156
- 2023Score-Based Diffusion Models as Principled Priors for Inverse Imagingcited by 126
- 2023Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Datacited by 108
- 2018Adversarial Regularizers in Inverse Problemscited by 102
- 2019Invertible generative models for inverse problems: mitigating representation error and dataset biascited by 93
34 more
- 2018Phase Retrieval Under a Generative Priorcited by 73
- 2020Learned convex regularizers for inverse problemscited by 54
- 2021Uniform Convergence of Interpolators: Gaussian Width, Norm Bounds, and Benign Overfittingcited by 54
- 2020Total Deep Variation for Linear Inverse Problemscited by 53
- 2021Measuring Robustness in Deep Learning Based Compressive Sensingcited by 53
- 2014Sparse Modeling for Image and Vision Processingcited by 48
- 2018Blind Image Deconvolution using Deep Generative Priorscited by 40
- 2022A Neural-Network-Based Convex Regularizer for Inverse Problemscited by 40
- 2015Simple, Efficient, and Neural Algorithms for Sparse Codingcited by 37
- 2019Low-rank matrix recovery with composite optimization: good conditioning and rapid convergencecited by 31
- 2023Learning Weakly Convex Regularizers for Convergent Image-Reconstruction Algorithmscited by 30
- 2022Sensing Theorems for Unsupervised Learning in Linear Inverse Problemscited by 28
- 2016A note on the sample complexity of the Er-SpUD algorithm by Spielman, Wang and Wright for exact recovery of sparsely used dictionariescited by 26
- 2021Learning the optimal Tikhonov regularizer for inverse problemscited by 26
- 2013Learning Sparsely Used Overcomplete Dictionaries via Alternating Minimizationcited by 24
- 2023What's in a Prior? Learned Proximal Networks for Inverse Problemscited by 24
- 2014Dictionary Learning and Tensor Decomposition via the Sum-of-Squares Methodcited by 22
- 2022Unsupervised Learning From Incomplete Measurements for Inverse Problemscited by 20
- 2019Alternating Phase Projected Gradient Descent with Generative Priors for Solving Compressive Phase Retrievalcited by 18
- 2017Structured signal recovery from quadratic measurements: Breaking sample complexity barriers via nonconvex optimizationcited by 13
- 2024Weakly Convex Regularisers for Inverse Problems: Convergence of Critical Points and Primal-Dual Optimisationcited by 12
- 2015Sharp Time--Data Tradeoffs for Linear Inverse Problemscited by 8
- 2023Image Reconstruction without Explicit Priorscited by 8
- 2013A Clustering Approach to Learn Sparsely-Used Overcomplete Dictionariescited by 7
- 2019Fitting Tractable Convex Sets to Support Function Evaluationscited by 7
- 2020On Suboptimality of Least Squares with Application to Estimation of Convex Bodiescited by 7
- 2020Stochastic geometry to generalize the Mondrian Processcited by 6
- 2022Optimal Regularization for a Data Sourcecited by 6
- 2018Rate-Optimal Denoising with Deep Neural Networkscited by 5
- 2023Discovering Structure From Corruption for Unsupervised Image Reconstructioncited by 5
- 2015Convergence radius and sample complexity of ITKM algorithms for dictionary learningcited by 4
- 2021A theory of optimal convex regularization for low-dimensional recoverycited by 4
- 2020Compressive Phase Retrieval: Optimal Sample Complexity with Deep Generative Priorscited by 3
- 2017Learning Semidefinite Regularizerscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
3 papers.