Should penalized least squares regression be interpreted as maximum a posteriori estimation?

76Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Penalized least squares regression is often used for signal denoising and inverse problems, and is commonly interpreted in a Bayesian framework as a Maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimator, the penalty function being the negative logarithm of the prior. For example, the widely used quadratic program (with an ℓ1 penalty) associated to the LASSO/basis pursuit denoising is very often considered as MAP estimation under a Laplacian prior in the context of additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) reduction. This paper highlights the fact that, while this is one possible Bayesian interpretation, there can be other equally acceptable Bayesian interpretations. Therefore, solving a penalized least squares regression problem with penalty φ(x) need not be interpreted as assuming a prior C·(-φ(x)) and using the MAP estimator. In particular, it is shown that for any prior PX, the minimum mean-square error (MMSE) estimator is the solution of a penalized least square problem with some penalty φ(x), which can be interpreted as the MAP estimator with the prior C·(-φ(x)). Vice versa, for certain penalties φ(x), the solution of the penalized least squares problem is indeed the MMSE estimator, with a certain prior PX. In general dP X(x)≠ C·(-φ(x))dx. © 2011 IEEE.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gribonval, R. (2011). Should penalized least squares regression be interpreted as maximum a posteriori estimation? IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 59(5), 2405–2410. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2011.2107908

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free