Abstract:By now Bayesian methods are routinely used in practice for solving inverse problems. In inverse problems the parameter or signal of interest is observed only indirectly, as an image of a given map, and the observations are typically further corrupted with noise. Bayes offers a natural way to regularize these problems via the prior distribution and provides a probabilistic solution, quantifying the remaining uncertainty in the problem. However, the computational costs of standard, sampling based Bayesian approaches can be overly large in such complex models. Therefore, in practice variational Bayes is becoming increasingly popular. Nevertheless, the theoretical understanding of these methods is still relatively limited, especially in context of inverse problems. In our analysis we investigate variational Bayesian methods for Gaussian process priors to solve linear inverse problems. We consider both mildly and severely ill-posed inverse problems and work with the popular inducing variables variational Bayes approach proposed by Titsias in 2009. We derive posterior contraction rates for the variational posterior in general settings and show that the minimax estimation rate can be attained by correctly tunned procedures. As specific examples we consider a collection of inverse problems including the heat equation, Volterra operator and Radon transform and inducing variable methods based on population and empirical spectral features.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The core problem that this paper attempts to solve is: how to effectively solve linear inverse problems by using the variational Bayes method (VB) combined with Gaussian Process Priors while keeping the computational cost controllable. Specifically, the paper focuses on how to make the variational posterior distribution converge to the true function parameter \( f_0 \) at the optimal minimax estimation rate by reasonably selecting the number of inducing variables in mildly and severely ill - posed inverse problems.
### Background of the Paper and Problem Description
1. **Definition of Inverse Problems**:
- An inverse problem means that we can only indirectly observe the parameters or signals of interest, usually the image of a given mapping, and the observed data are usually contaminated by noise.
- Inverse problems are often ill - posed, that is, the inverse of the mapping is not continuous, which leads to the amplification of measurement errors when directly inverting.
2. **Advantages of the Bayesian Method**:
- The Bayesian method naturally introduces regularization through the prior distribution, providing a probabilistic solution and being able to quantify the remaining uncertainty in the problem.
- However, the standard sampling - based Bayesian method has a too - high computational cost in complex models, so the variational Bayes method has gradually become popular.
3. **Theoretical Challenges of the Variational Bayes Method**:
- Although the variational Bayes method is widely applied in practice, its theoretical understanding is still relatively limited, especially in the context of inverse problems.
### Main Contributions of the Paper
1. **Theoretical Analysis**:
- The paper studies the performance of the variational Bayes method using Gaussian Process Priors in solving linear inverse problems.
- The author considers mildly and severely ill - posed inverse problems and uses the variational Bayes method based on inducing variables proposed by Titsias.
- The contraction rate of the variational posterior distribution is derived, and it is proved that under appropriately adjusted conditions, the optimal minimax estimation rate can be achieved.
2. **Specific Methods**:
- The paper focuses on two inducing - variable - based methods on spectral characteristics: the population spectral characteristic method and the empirical spectral characteristic method.
- It is proved that under certain conditions, both methods can make the variational posterior distribution converge to the true function at the optimal contraction rate.
### Specific Examples
1. **Volterra Operator**:
- The Volterra operator is a mildly ill - posed inverse problem, and its eigenvalues and eigenbases are \(\kappa_j^2=(j - 1/2)^{-2}\pi^{-2}\), \(e_j(x)=\sqrt{2}\cos((j - 1/2)\pi x)\), \(g_j(x)=\sqrt{2}\sin((j - 1/2)\pi x)\) respectively.
- By appropriately selecting the number of inducing variables, the variational posterior distribution can reach the optimal minimax contraction rate.
2. **Heat Equation**:
- The heat equation is a severely ill - posed inverse problem, and its eigenvalues and eigenbases are \(\kappa_j = e^{-j^2\pi^2T}\), \(e_j(x)=g_j(x)=\sqrt{2}\sin(j\pi x)\) respectively.
- By appropriately selecting the number of inducing variables, the variational posterior distribution can reach the optimal minimax contraction rate.
3. **Radon Transform**:
- The Radon transform is a mildly ill - posed inverse problem, and its eigenvalues and eigenbases can be represented by Zernike polynomials and Chebyshev polynomials.
- By appropriately selecting the number of inducing variables, the variational posterior distribution can reach the optimal minimax contraction rate.
### Conclusion
Through strict theoretical analysis and specific examples, the paper shows the effectiveness and superiority of the variational Bayes method in solving linear inverse problems. In particular, by reasonably selecting the number of inducing variables, the optimal estimation accuracy can be achieved while maintaining computational efficiency. This conclusion.