Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Unifying AMP Algorithms for Rotationally-Invariant Models

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that AMP algorithms for rotationally-invariant random matrices are pinned down by a single formula: the de-biasing matrix must be built from free cumulants of the spectral law, and with that choice the iterates become…

desk verdict A useful reduction template for building RI-AMP algorithms, with the main theorem's proof resting on a convergence claim that is asserted but not proved; worth refereeing carefully. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.01574 v1 pith:DU7YBRLD submitted 2024-12-02 math.ST cs.ITcs.LGmath.ITmath.PRstat.TH

Songbin Liu , Junjie Ma This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.STcs.ITcs.LGmath.ITmath.PRstat.TH MSC 60B2062F1246L54
keywords approximatemessagepassingrotationally-invariantrandommatricesfreecumulantsorthogonalAMPstateevolutionOnsagercorrectionspikedmatrixmodelshigh-dimensionalestimation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Approximate message passing (AMP) for rotationally-invariant random matrices has previously been derived case by case, with the Onsager correction terms emerging from lengthy calculations. This paper claims a single mechanism behind all such algorithms: any first-order iteration of the form $r_t = W u_t - \sum_{i=1}^t b_{t,i} u_i$ with $u_{t+1} = \eta_{t+1}(r_1,\dots,r_t)$ can be unfolded by orthogonal decomposition into an orthogonal AMP iteration, and the coefficients $b_{t,i}$ needed to make that unfolding work are uniquely determined. The required de-biasing matrix is $B_t = \sum_{i=1}^t \kappa_i D_t^{i-1}$, where $\kappa_i$ are the free cumulants of the limiting spectral law and $D_t$ collects the average derivatives of the denoisers. With this choice the iterates are asymptotically Gaussian and their covariance is given by a closed-form state evolution. The same recipe rederives the known RI-AMP algorithm and produces new variants, including one that allows a non-polynomial nonlinear matrix-processing step.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is a recursive orthogonal decomposition of the iterates combined with matrix centering. One defines residual vectors $\bar{u}_t$ by subtracting from $u_t$ the projection onto the past $r_i$'s, with projection coefficients given by average derivatives, so that $\bar{u}_t$ is asymptotically orthogonal to all previous $r_i$. Unfolding the first-order method then expresses $(r_1,\dots,r_t)$ as a lower-triangular block matrix $P_t(W)$ acting on $(\bar{u}_1,\dots,\bar{u}_t)$, where $P_t(\lambda) = (I_t - \lambda D_t + B_t D_t)^{-1}(\lambda I_t - B_t)$. The trace-free condition $E[P_t(\Lambda)] = 0$ singles out a unique $B_t$; solving it introduces the polynomials $Q_n$ defined by $Q_n(\lambda) = \lambda Q_{n-1}(\lambda) - \sum_{i=1}^n E[\Lambda Q_{i-1}(\Lambda)] Q_{n-i}(\lambda)$, whose coefficients are exactly the free cumulants $\kappa_n = E[\Lambda Q_{n-1}(\Lambda)]$. This centering converts the iteration into an OAMP with trace-free matrix denoisers and divergence-free iterate denoisers, and the OAMP state evolution then transfers to the original iterates.

What would settle it

A concrete check: choose a rotationally-invariant $W$ with a known limiting spectrum and a smooth denoiser for which the empirical average-derivative matrix $\hat{\Phi}_t$ does not converge in probability (for example, one whose derivative oscillates on a scale shrinking with $N$), run the RI-AMP iteration, and test whether the empirical distribution of $(r_1,\dots,r_t)$ converges to the zero-mean Gaussian with covariance $\Sigma_t$ in Theorem 2. Any limiting mismatch would refute the claim that the de-biasing formula works for the full Lipschitz class.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the Onsager or de-biasing coefficients of AMP for rotationally-invariant models are not free parameters but are forced by the requirement that the iterates be asymptotically Gaussian. Starting from the first-order method, the paper represents the iterates as $\mathbf{r}_t = \sum_{i=1}^t P_{t,i}(W)\bar{u}_i$ in terms of orthogonal residuals $\bar{u}_i$, with $P_t(\lambda) = (I_t - \lambda D_t + B_t D_t)^{-1}(\lambda I_t - B_t)$. Enforcing the trace-free condition $E[P_t(\Lambda)] = 0$ for $\Lambda$ distributed as the limiting spectrum has a unique solution in $B_t$, namely $B_t = \sum_{i=1}^t \kappa_i D_t^{i-1}$ with $\kappa_i$ the free cumulants of $\mu$. Under this choice the unfolded iteration is an orthogonal AMP algorithm, and the OAMP state evolution implies that $(r_1,\dots,r_t)$ converges in empirical distribution to a zero-mean Gaussian vector with covariance $\Sigma_t = E[P_t(\Lambda)\bar{\Delta}_t P_t(\Lambda)^T]$.

Load-bearing premise

The proof needs the random, data-dependent average derivatives of the denoisers to converge in probability to fixed limits as the dimension grows; if that concentration fails for some admissible smooth denoiser, the reduction to OAMP and the Gaussian state evolution are not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any first-order method with a fixed denoiser sequence, Lemma 2 pins down the Onsager terms uniquely: no other de-biasing matrix makes the relevant polynomial matrices asymptotically trace-free.
  • The iterates $r_t$ of RI-AMP are asymptotically zero-mean Gaussian with covariance given by Theorem 2, so error metrics such as mean squared error can be computed by a closed-form state evolution instead of by simulation.
  • The framework rederives the RI-AMP algorithm of [21] and gives an alternative state evolution that Proposition 3 shows is equivalent to the earlier one.
  • The RI-AMP-DF variant is equivalent to generalized first-order methods up to a change of variables, so the derivation covers a broader class of iterative algorithms than the original RI-AMP.
  • The RI-AMP-MP variant extends the BAMP algorithm of [3] to non-polynomial matrix-processing functions, and Theorem 4 provides the associated state evolution, with numerical experiments matching the prediction.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the reduction is as general as stated, the design of AMP-type algorithms reduces to choosing the denoisers and the matrix-processing function; the Onsager terms are then automatic, which suggests the same recursive centering could be applied to other iterative high-dimensional algorithms beyond AMP.
  • The recursive free-cumulant characterization and the Monte Carlo estimator in Algorithm 2 point to a practical way to implement RI-AMP when the spectrum is unknown, using only matrix-vector products; the paper does not develop convergence guarantees for this estimator.
  • The equivalence between RI-AMP-DF and generalized first-order methods suggests that optimality results for spiked models might extend to non-polynomial matrix processing, a question beyond what the paper proves.
  • In spectra where the higher free cumulants vanish (such as the GOE), the de-biasing matrix collapses to the divergence matrix and the algorithm shortens to standard memory AMP; this makes spectral shape alone the determinant of memory length.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a unified framework for constructing approximate message passing (AMP) algorithms for rotationally-invariant matrix models. Starting from a generic first-order method template, the authors reduce the algorithm to a long-memory orthogonal AMP (OAMP) recursion by imposing a trace-free condition on the polynomial coefficient matrices in the iterate representation. This leads to a unique de-biasing matrix B_t expressed as a polynomial of the divergence matrix D_t, with coefficients identified as free cumulants of the limiting spectral measure. The authors derive the state evolution of the resulting RI-AMP, prove consistency with the state evolution of Fan [21], and introduce two new variants: RI-AMP-DF with a different Onsager term, and RI-AMP-MP with nonlinear matrix processing. The framework is applied to spiked matrix models, yielding a non-polynomial generalization of BAMP, and numerical experiments illustrate accuracy of the state evolution predictions.

Significance. If the main claims hold, the paper provides a genuinely unified and arguably more transparent derivation of the Onsager terms for rotationally-invariant AMP, with the free cumulants emerging from a recursive centering operation rather than from asymptotic integral evaluations. The recursive characterization of free cumulants in Proposition 1 and the explicit derivation of B_t = sum_i κ_i D_t^{i-1} in Lemma 2 are elegant and proved in detail; the equivalence result in Proposition 3 is a substantive cross-check. The two proposed variants, especially RI-AMP-MP with non-polynomial matrix processing, are plausible new algorithmic tools and are supported by preliminary numerical evidence. However, the rigorous status of the central state evolution theorem is weakened by an unproved convergence step for the empirical divergence matrix, and several supporting lemmas/theorems are stated without proofs. These gaps are local in the sense that they appear fixable, but they are load-bearing for the main claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix C.3, around Eq. (118)-(121)] The convergence of the empirical divergence matrix \hat Φ_t to a deterministic limit Φ_t is asserted with the parenthetical 'the above limit holds by an inductive argument', but the induction is never given. This step is load-bearing: the reduction to OAMP replaces the random polynomials \hat P_{t,i}(W) by deterministic P_{t,i}(W), and the trace-free condition E[P_t(Λ)] = 0 used in the state evolution depends on this replacement. To close the argument, the authors must show that, conditional on the Gaussian limit obtained at time t, the empirical averages \langle ∂_i η_j(r_1,...,r_{j-1}) \rangle concentrate on E[∂_i η_j(R_1,...,R_{j-1})], and then propagate this to time t+1. The standard conditioning arguments of Bayati-Montanari, Fan, or Takeuchi are not adapted to the random-coefficient setting here, so the proof of Theorem 2 is incomplete.
  2. [Section 5.2, Lemma 4] Lemma 4 is a central result for the RI-AMP-MP variant: it states the reformulation (62), the existence and uniqueness of the de-biasing matrix E_t solving (63), and the recursive structure of the resulting functions. Its proof is omitted with the sentence 'Its proof is similar to that of Lemma 1 and Lemma 2, and thus omitted.' For a lemma that underlies Theorem 4 and the claimed non-polynomial generalization of BAMP, this is not sufficient. The uniqueness of E_t is not obvious because diag{f_1(λ),...,f_t(λ)} does not commute with \hat Φ_t, and the representation (70b) is essential for the state evolution. The proof should be supplied, or the lemma should be replaced by a precise statement with a complete reference.
  3. [Theorems 3 and 4] The state evolution statements for RI-AMP-DF and RI-AMP-MP, Theorem 3(2) and Theorem 4(2), are both dismissed with 'similar to that of Theorem 2' or 'omitted'. Since Theorem 2 itself rests on the unproved convergence of \hat Φ_t identified above, these variants inherit that gap. In addition, Theorem 4 replaces W by Y = (θ/N)x_*x_*^T + W, and the reduction must address the fact that the matrix processing functions f_t are now applied to Y rather than to the noise matrix W; the covariance formulas (71c)-(71e) require a separate verification that the OAMP state evolution for spiked models applies to the random-coefficient reduction. This is not merely a cosmetic repetition of earlier arguments.
  4. [Assumption 2(3) and Definition 4] Assumption 2 only requires the denoisers η_t to be Lipschitz continuous, but the RI-AMP iteration in Definition 4 uses empirical partial derivatives ⟨∂_i u_t⟩, and the OAMP state evolution invoked in Theorem 1 (and proved in Appendix B) assumes that the corresponding functions are continuously differentiable with bounded derivatives. A Lipschitz function may fail to be differentiable on a set of positive measure, and the Stein-lemma argument used in Proposition 2 and in the covariance computation requires control of the derivatives of the limiting denoisers. Either Assumption 2 must be strengthened to, say, continuously differentiable denoisers with Lipschitz derivatives, or a rigorous justification must be given that the weak derivatives of Lipschitz functions suffice for the empirical-divergence limits used here.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.3 heading] The heading 'Monte Carlo Estimator of Free Cumulants' contains a typo: 'Onager' should be 'Onsager'.
  2. [Introduction, references] The reference list contains a duplicate entry: '[49, 49]' appears in the first paragraph of Section 1.1.
  3. [Lemma 3 proof] In the proof of Lemma 3, the sentence 'The second equality in the above equation is due to the recursive characterization of free cumulants in Lemma 1' appears to refer to the wrong result; the identification of the coefficients with free cumulants is Proposition 1, not Lemma 1.
  4. [Figure 2 caption] The caption says 'The empirical results are average over 50 independent runs'; this should read 'averaged over 50 independent runs'.
  5. [Notation, Section 2.2] In Corollary 1 and Algorithm 1, the initialization α_{n,-1}=0 is used for all n, but the recursion for n=1 is not explicitly separated; adding a one-line verification for n=1 would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the Onsager coefficients are solved from the trace-free condition and identified with free cumulants by a proved recursion; the main reduction is self-contained, with minor self-citation and an omitted concentration proof as caveats.

full rationale

The central claim (Lemma 2 + Theorem 2) does not reduce to its inputs by construction. Lemma 2's de-biasing matrix B_t is solved uniquely from E[P_t(Λ)]=0 and represented as sum α_i D_t^{i-1}; the coefficients α_n=E[ΛQ_{n-1}] are shown equal to free cumulants κ_n in Proposition 1 via the moment-cumulant formula, proved in Appendix A.3. The known Fan/Opper RI-AMP is used as a consistency check (Proposition 3), not as an input. The Gaussianity conclusion comes from the OAMP state evolution (Theorem 1), which is proved in Appendix B by approximating the OAMP iteration by the VAMP iteration of the external work [19]; it is not imported from the authors' own previous papers. The two caveats that prevent a perfect 0 are not circular reductions. First, Appendix C.3 replaces the random divergence matrix bΦ_t by its deterministic limit Φ_t and states 'the above limit holds by an inductive argument' without writing the induction; this is a load-bearing omitted proof, but the induction is not circular because it would use the already-proved Gaussianity of earlier iterates to control the next divergence, rather than assuming the conclusion. Second, the spiked-model application (Theorem 4) invokes Lemma 5, whose proof is attributed to the authors' own prior work [18] with 'we omit the details'; this is a self-citation in an application section, but the cited result is a variant of the externally grounded Theorem 1 and does not support the main unification claim. There is also a minor missing-reference typo in Appendix C.2, which cites 'Proposition 5' where Proposition 1 is meant. None of these make the derivation equivalent to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation introduces no fitted constants and no new physical or algorithmic entities. The free cumulants are defined by the standard moment-cumulant formula, and the only inputs are the spectral measure and the user-chosen denoisers. All axioms are standard assumptions for rotationally-invariant AMP analysis.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Moments of the spectral measure μ exist to all orders and the empirical spectral distribution of W converges weakly to μ with bounded operator norm.
    Assumption 2(1). Needed for free cumulants to be defined and for polynomial matrix functions to have well-behaved traces.
  • domain assumption The orthogonal eigenbasis O of W is Haar-distributed and independent of the initialization and side information.
    Assumption 2(1) and Assumption 1(1). This rotational invariance is the core property that makes OAMP state evolution valid.
  • domain assumption Denoisers η_t and g_t are Lipschitz (and continuously differentiable as needed) and act row-wise; initialization has finite moments.
    Assumptions 1(4), 2(2), 2(3). Required for the W2 convergence of empirical distributions and Stein-lemma-type orthogonality.
  • standard math The moment-cumulant formula m_k = Σ_{π∈NC(k)} κ_π defines the free cumulants.
    Equation (4), standard free probability (Nica-Speicher). Used as the definition and in the proof of Prop 1.
  • standard math OAMP state evolution (Theorem 1) holds for the long-memory OAMP class.
    Proved in Appendix B as a modification of [19, Theorem 2]; used to conclude Gaussianity of RI-AMP iterates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unifying AMP Algorithms for Rotationally-Invariant Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DU7YBRLD

@misc{pith2026241201574,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unifying AMP Algorithms for Rotationally-Invariant Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DU7YBRLD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.01574}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents a unified framework for constructing Approximate Message Passing (AMP) algorithms for rotationally-invariant models. By employing a general iterative algorithm template and reducing it to long-memory Orthogonal AMP (OAMP), we systematically derive the correct Onsager terms of AMP algorithms. This approach allows us to rederive an AMP algorithm introduced by Fan and Opper et al., while shedding new light on the role of free cumulants of the spectral law. The free cumulants arise naturally from a recursive centering operation, potentially of independent interest beyond the scope of AMP. To illustrate the flexibility of our framework, we introduce two novel AMP variants and apply them to estimation in spiked models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.01574 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A non-crossing partition of {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}: ({1}, {2, 5}, {3, 4}). Free cumulant. Let mk := E[Xk ] be the k-th moment of a random variable X. The free cumulants (κk)k≥1 of X are defined implicitly in terms of the moments (mk)m≥1 through the moment-cumulant formula [41]: mk = X π∈NC(k) κπ, (4) where κπ := Q B∈π κ|B| is the product of free cumulants corresponding to the cardinality of every block B ∈ π. For example, … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. MSE performance of the RI-AMP-MP algorithm and the BAMP algorithm [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Map from (s1, . . . , s5) = (1, 0, 0, 2, 2) ∈ S(5) to a Dyck path of length 10 marked in solid lines. Right: Map from the Dyck path to a non-crossing partition of [5]: ({1}, {2, 5}, {3, 4}). (The non￾crossing partition is depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Memory AMP: Overflow Avoidance, Complexity Reduction, and Comparative Analysis

    cs.IT 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Overflow-avoiding and reduced-complexity variants of memory AMP are derived, and the finite-precision divergence of warm-started CG-VAMP is traced to catastrophic cancellation in orthogonalization parameters.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [21]

    Approximate message passing algorithms for rotationally invariant matrices

    Zhou Fan. Approximate message passing algorithms for rotationally invariant matrices. The Annals of Statistics, 50(1):197–224, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    An introduction to random matrices

    Greg W Anderson, Alice Guionnet, and Ofer Zeitouni. An introduction to random matrices . Number

    work page

  3. [2]

    Optimal errors and phase transitions in high-dimensional generalized linear models

    Jean Barbier, Florent Krzakala, Nicolas Macris, L´ eo Miolane, and Lenka Zdeborov´ a. Optimal errors and phase transitions in high-dimensional generalized linear models. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(12):5451–5460, 2019

    2019

  4. [3]

    Fundamental limits in structured principal component analysis and how to reach them

    Jean Barbier, Francesco Camilli, Marco Mondelli, and Manuel S´ aenz. Fundamental limits in structured principal component analysis and how to reach them. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(30):e2302028120, 2023. 22

    work page 2023

  5. [4]

    Information limits and Thouless-Anderson-Palmer equations for spiked matrix models with structured noise

    Jean Barbier, Francesco Camilli, Marco Mondelli, and Yizhou Xu. Information limits and Thouless-Anderson-Palmer equations for spiked matrix models with structured noise. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20993, 2024

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  6. [5]

    The dynamics of message passing on dense graphs, with appli- cations to compressed sensing

    Mohsen Bayati and Andrea Montanari. The dynamics of message passing on dense graphs, with appli- cations to compressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 57(2):764–785, 2011

    work page 2011

  7. [6]

    The LASSO risk for gaussian matrices

    Mohsen Bayati and Andrea Montanari. The LASSO risk for gaussian matrices. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 58(4):1997–2017, 2011

    work page 1997

  8. [7]

    An iterative construction of solutions of the TAP equations for the sherrington– kirkpatrick model

    Erwin Bolthausen. An iterative construction of solutions of the TAP equations for the sherrington– kirkpatrick model. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 325(1):333–366, 2014

    work page 2014

Show all 63 references
  1. [8]

    Algorithmic analysis and statistical estimation of SLOPE via approximate message passing

    Zhiqi Bu, Jason M Klusowski, Cynthia Rush, and Weijie J Su. Algorithmic analysis and statistical estimation of SLOPE via approximate message passing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 67 (1):506–537, 2020

    2020

  2. [9]

    A non-asymptotic analysis of generalized vector approximate message passing algorithms with rotationally invariant designs

    Collin Cademartori and Cynthia Rush. A non-asymptotic analysis of generalized vector approximate message passing algorithms with rotationally invariant designs. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 2024

    2024

  3. [10]

    S-amp: Approximate message passing for general matrix ensembles

    Burak Cakmak, Ole Winther, and Bernard H Fleury. S-amp: Approximate message passing for general matrix ensembles. In 2014 IEEE Information Theory Workshop (ITW 2014) , pages 192–196. IEEE, 2014

    2014

  4. [11]

    The estimation error of general first order methods

    Michael Celentano, Andrea Montanari, and Yuchen Wu. The estimation error of general first order methods. In Conference on Learning Theory, pages 1078–1141. PMLR, 2020

    2020

  5. [12]

    Orthogonal AMP for massive access in channels with spatial and temporal correlations

    Yiyao Cheng, Lei Liu, and Li Ping. Orthogonal AMP for massive access in channels with spatial and temporal correlations. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , 39(3):726–740, 2020

    2020

  6. [13]

    Message-passing algorithms for compressed sensing

    David L Donoho, Arian Maleki, and Andrea Montanari. Message-passing algorithms for compressed sensing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 106(45):18914–18919, 2009

    2009

  7. [14]

    The noise-sensitivity phase transition in com- pressed sensing

    David L Donoho, Arian Maleki, and Andrea Montanari. The noise-sensitivity phase transition in com- pressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 57(10):6920–6941, 2011

    2011

  8. [15]

    Information-theoretically optimal com- pressed sensing via spatial coupling and approximate message passing

    David L Donoho, Adel Javanmard, and Andrea Montanari. Information-theoretically optimal com- pressed sensing via spatial coupling and approximate message passing. IEEE transactions on informa- tion theory, 59(11):7434–7464, 2013

    2013

  9. [16]

    Universality of linearized message passing for phase retrieval with structured sensing matrices

    Rishabh Dudeja and Milad Bakhshizadeh. Universality of linearized message passing for phase retrieval with structured sensing matrices. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 68(11):7545–7574, 2022

    2022

  10. [17]

    Lu, and Subhabrata Sen

    Rishabh Dudeja, Yue M. Lu, and Subhabrata Sen. Universality of approximate message passing with semirandom matrices. The Annals of Probability , 51(5):1616–1683, 2023

    2023

  11. [18]

    Optimality of approximate message passing algorithms for spiked matrix models with rotationally invariant noise

    Rishabh Dudeja, Songbin Liu, and Junjie Ma. Optimality of approximate message passing algorithms for spiked matrix models with rotationally invariant noise. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18081 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Spectral universality in regularized linear regression with nearly deterministic sensing matrices

    Rishabh Dudeja, Subhabrata Sen, and Yue M Lu. Spectral universality in regularized linear regression with nearly deterministic sensing matrices. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 2024

    2024

  13. [20]

    Optimization of mean-field spin glasses

    Ahmed El Alaoui, Andrea Montanari, and Mark Sellke. Optimization of mean-field spin glasses. The Annals of Probability, 49(6):2922–2960, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    A unifying tutorial on approximate message passing

    Oliver Y Feng, Ramji Venkataramanan, Cynthia Rush, Richard J Samworth, et al. A unifying tutorial on approximate message passing. Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning, 15(4):335–536, 2022. 23

    2022

  15. [23]

    Inference in deep networks in high dimensions

    Alyson K Fletcher, Sundeep Rangan, and Philip Schniter. Inference in deep networks in high dimensions. In 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) , pages 1884–1888. IEEE, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    A CDMA multiuser detection algorithm on the basis of belief propagation

    Yoshiyuki Kabashima. A CDMA multiuser detection algorithm on the basis of belief propagation. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 36(43):11111, 2003

    2003

  17. [25]

    Phase transitions and sample complexity in Bayes-optimal matrix factorization

    Yoshiyuki Kabashima, Florent Krzakala, Marc M´ ezard, Ayaka Sakata, and Lenka Zdeborov´ a. Phase transitions and sample complexity in Bayes-optimal matrix factorization. IEEE Transactions on infor- mation theory, 62(7):4228–4265, 2016

    2016

  18. [26]

    A non-asymptotic framework for approximate message passing in spiked models

    Gen Li and Yuting Wei. A non-asymptotic framework for approximate message passing in spiked models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.03313 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Approximate message passing from random initialization with appli- cations to Z2 synchronization

    Gen Li, Wei Fan, and Yuting Wei. Approximate message passing from random initialization with appli- cations to Z2 synchronization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 120(31):e2302930120, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Spectrum-aware adjustment: A new debiasing framework with applications to principal components regression

    Yufan Li and Pragya Sur. Spectrum-aware adjustment: A new debiasing framework with applications to principal components regression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.07810 , 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Memory AMP

    Lei Liu, Shunqi Huang, and Brian M Kurkoski. Memory AMP. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 68(12):8015–8039, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Orthogonal AMP

    Junjie Ma and Li Ping. Orthogonal AMP. IEEE Access, 5:2020–2033, 2017

    2020

  23. [31]

    Turbo compressed sensing with partial DFT sensing matrix

    Junjie Ma, Xiaojun Yuan, and Li Ping. Turbo compressed sensing with partial DFT sensing matrix. IEEE Signal Processing Letters , 22(2):158–161, 2014

    2014

  24. [32]

    Spectral method for phase retrieval: an expectation propagation perspective

    Junjie Ma, Rishabh Dudeja, Ji Xu, Arian Maleki, and Xiaodong Wang. Spectral method for phase retrieval: an expectation propagation perspective. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 67(2): 1332–1355, 2021

    2021

  25. [33]

    Towards designing optimal sensing matrices for generalized linear inverse problems

    Junjie Ma, Ji Xu, and Arian Maleki. Towards designing optimal sensing matrices for generalized linear inverse problems. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    High-temperature expansions and message passing algorithms

    Antoine Maillard, Laura Foini, Alejandro Lage Castellanos, Florent Krzakala, Marc M´ ezard, and Lenka Zdeborov´ a. High-temperature expansions and message passing algorithms. Journal of Statistical Me- chanics: Theory and Experiment , 2019(11):113301, 2019

    2019

  27. [35]

    Generating functional analysis for iterative CDMA multiuser detectors

    Kazushi Mimura and Masato Okada. Generating functional analysis for iterative CDMA multiuser detectors. IEEE transactions on information theory , 60(6):3645–3670, 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    Free probability and random matrices, volume 35

    James A Mingo and Roland Speicher. Free probability and random matrices, volume 35. Springer, 2017

    2017

  29. [37]

    Expectation propagation for approximate bayesian inference

    Thomas P Minka. Expectation propagation for approximate bayesian inference. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.2294, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Estimation of low-rank matrices via approximate mes- sage passing

    Andrea Montanari and Ramji Venkataramanan. Estimation of low-rank matrices via approximate mes- sage passing. The Annals of Statistics , 49(1), 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Equivalence of approximate message passing and low-degree polynomials in rank-one matrix estimation

    Andrea Montanari and Alexander S Wein. Equivalence of approximate message passing and low-degree polynomials in rank-one matrix estimation. Probability Theory and Related Fields , pages 1–53, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Statistically optimal first order algorithms: a proof via orthogo- nalization

    Andrea Montanari and Yuchen Wu. Statistically optimal first order algorithms: a proof via orthogo- nalization. Information and Inference: A Journal of the IMA , 13(4):iaae027, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    Lectures on the combinatorics of free probability , volume 13

    Alexandru Nica and Roland Speicher. Lectures on the combinatorics of free probability , volume 13. Cambridge University Press, 2006

    2006

  34. [42]

    Expectation consistent approximate inference

    Manfred Opper, Ole Winther, and Michael J Jordan. Expectation consistent approximate inference. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 6(12), 2005. 24

    2005

  35. [43]

    A theory of solving TAP equations for Ising models with general invariant random matrices

    Manfred Opper, Burak Cakmak, and Ole Winther. A theory of solving TAP equations for Ising models with general invariant random matrices. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , 49(11): 114002, 2016

    2016

  36. [44]

    Inference with deep generative priors in high dimensions.IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory, 1(1):336–347, 2020

    Parthe Pandit, Mojtaba Sahraee-Ardakan, Sundeep Rangan, Philip Schniter, and Alyson K Fletcher. Inference with deep generative priors in high dimensions.IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory, 1(1):336–347, 2020

    2020

  37. [45]

    Bilinear generalized approximate message pass- ing—part i: Derivation

    Jason T Parker, Philip Schniter, and Volkan Cevher. Bilinear generalized approximate message pass- ing—part i: Derivation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , 62(22):5839–5853, 2014

    2014

  38. [46]

    Iterative estimation of constrained rank-one matrices in noise

    Sundeep Rangan and Alyson K Fletcher. Iterative estimation of constrained rank-one matrices in noise. In 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings , pages 1246–1250. IEEE, 2012

    2012

  39. [47]

    Vector approximate message passing

    Sundeep Rangan, Philip Schniter, and Alyson K Fletcher. Vector approximate message passing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 65(10):6664–6684, 2019

    2019

  40. [48]

    The replica-symmetric prediction for random linear estimation with gaussian matrices is exact

    Galen Reeves and Henry D Pfister. The replica-symmetric prediction for random linear estimation with gaussian matrices is exact. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 65(4):2252–2283, 2019

    2019

  41. [49]

    Linear operator approximate message passing (opamp)

    Riccardo Rossetti, Bobak Nazer, and Galen Reeves. Linear operator approximate message passing (opamp). arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.08225 , 2024

    2024

  42. [50]

    A modern maximum-likelihood theory for high-dimensional logistic regression

    Pragya Sur and Emmanuel J Cand` es. A modern maximum-likelihood theory for high-dimensional logistic regression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 116(29):14516–14525, 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    Rigorous dynamics of expectation-propagation-based signal recovery from unitarily invariant measurements

    Keigo Takeuchi. Rigorous dynamics of expectation-propagation-based signal recovery from unitarily invariant measurements. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 66(1):368–386, 2019

    2019

  44. [52]

    A unified framework of state evolution for message-passing algorithms

    Keigo Takeuchi. A unified framework of state evolution for message-passing algorithms. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) , pages 151–155. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  45. [53]

    Bayes-optimal convolutional AMP

    Keigo Takeuchi. Bayes-optimal convolutional AMP. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 67(7): 4405–4428, 2021

    2021

  46. [54]

    Orthogonal approximate message-passing for spatially coupled linear models

    Keigo Takeuchi. Orthogonal approximate message-passing for spatially coupled linear models. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 2023

    2023

  47. [55]

    Estimation in rotationally invariant gener- alized linear models via approximate message passing

    Ramji Venkataramanan, Kevin K¨ ogler, and Marco Mondelli. Estimation in rotationally invariant gener- alized linear models via approximate message passing. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 22120–22144. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  48. [56]

    Which bridge estimator is the best for variable selection? The Annals of Statistics , 48(5):2791–2823, 2020

    Shuaiwen Wang, Haolei Weng, and Arian Maleki. Which bridge estimator is the best for variable selection? The Annals of Statistics , 48(5):2791–2823, 2020

    2020

  49. [57]

    Universality of approximate message passing algorithms and tensor networks

    Tianhao Wang, Xinyi Zhong, and Zhou Fan. Universality of approximate message passing algorithms and tensor networks. The Annals of Applied Probability , 34(4):3943–3994, 2024

    2024

  50. [58]

    Approximate message passing for multi- layer estimation in rotationally invariant models

    Yizhou Xu, TianQi Hou, ShanSuo Liang, and Marco Mondelli. Approximate message passing for multi- layer estimation in rotationally invariant models. In 2023 IEEE Information Theory Workshop (ITW) , pages 294–298. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  51. [59]

    A simple proof of maxwell saturation for coupled scalar recursions

    Arvind Yedla, Yung-Yih Jian, Phong S Nguyen, and Henry D Pfister. A simple proof of maxwell saturation for coupled scalar recursions. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 60(11):6943–6965, 2014

    2014

  52. [60]

    8Ym6hAwxmOpeI+WGP7OL6UT6XC8=

    Xinyi Zhong, Tianhao Wang, and Zhou Fan. Approximate message passing for orthogonally invariant ensembles: Multivariate non-linearities and spectral initialization. Information and Inference: A Journal of the IMA , 13(3):iaae024, 2024. 25 Appendix A Proofs for Preliminaries A....

    2024

  53. [62]

    Base case: {H1,n, ∀n ≥ 0}

  54. [63]

    28 Base case: When ℓ = 1, (82) reduces to H1,n : E[ΛQn] = q1+n, (83) which follows from the definition in (81)

    Induction step: for all ℓ ≥ 1, {Hℓ,n, ∀n ≥ 0} =⇒ {Hℓ+1,n, ∀n ≥ 0}. 28 Base case: When ℓ = 1, (82) reduces to H1,n : E[ΛQn] = q1+n, (83) which follows from the definition in (81). Induction step: We shall prove the following holds for all ℓ ≥ 1 and n ≥ 1: Hℓ,n =⇒ H ℓ+1,n−1. (84...

  55. [118]

    Cambridge university press, 2010

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.