In the high-dimensional regression model a response variable is linearly related to @math covariates, but the sample size @math is smaller than @math . We assume that only a small subset of covariates is active' (i.e., the corresponding coefficients are non-zero), and consider the model-selection problem of identifying the active covariates. A popular approach is to estimate the regression coefficients through the Lasso ( @math -regularized least squares). This is known to correctly identify the active set only if the irrelevant covariates are roughly orthogonal to the relevant ones, as quantified through the so called irrepresentability' condition. In this paper we study the Gauss-Lasso' selector, a simple two-stage method that first solves the Lasso, and then performs ordinary least squares restricted to the Lasso active set. We formulate generalized irrepresentability condition' (GIC), an assumption that is substantially weaker than irrepresentability. We prove that, under GIC, the Gauss-Lasso correctly recovers the active set.
@cite_16: Oracle inequalities and variable selection properties for the Lasso in linear models have been established under a variety of different assumptions on the design matrix. We show in this paper how the different conditions and concepts relate to each other. The restricted eigenvalue condition (, 2009) or the slightly weaker compatibility condition (van de Geer, 2007) are sufficient for oracle results. We argue that both these conditions allow for a fairly general class of design matrices. Hence, optimality of the Lasso for prediction and estimation holds for more general situations than what it appears from coherence (, 2007b,c) or restricted isometry (Candes and Tao, 2005) assumptions.
@cite_1: We consider the fundamental problem of estimating the mean of a vector y=Xβ+z, where X is an n×p design matrix in which one can have far more variables than observations, and z is a stochastic error term -— the so-called “p>n” setup. When β is sparse, or, more generally, when there is a sparse subset of covariates providing a close approximation to the unknown mean vector, we ask whether or not it is possible to accurately estimate Xβ using a computationally tractable algorithm. We show that, in a surprisingly wide range of situations, the lasso happens to nearly select the best subset of variables. Quantitatively speaking, we prove that solving a simple quadratic program achieves a squared error within a logarithmic factor of the ideal mean squared error that one would achieve with an oracle supplying perfect information about which variables should and should not be included in the model. Interestingly, our results describe the average performance of the lasso; that is, the performance one can expect in an vast majority of cases where Xβ is a sparse or nearly sparse superposition of variables, but not in all cases. Our results are nonasymptotic and widely applicable, since they simply require that pairs of predictor variables are not too collinear.
@cite_20: We derive the l! convergence rate simultaneously for Lasso and Dantzig estimators in a high-dimensional linear regression model under a mutual coherence assumption on the Gram matrix of the design and two di! erent assumptions on the noise: Gaussian noise and general noise with finite variance. Then we prove that simultaneously the thresholded Lasso and Dantzig estimators with a proper choice of the threshold enjoy a sign concentration property provided that the non-zero components of the target vector are not too small.
Let us finally mention that an alternative approach to establishing model-selection guarantees assumes a suitable mutual incoherence conditions. Lounici @cite_20 proves correct model selection under the assumption @math . This assumption is however stronger than irrepresentability @cite_16 . Cand 'es and Plan @cite_1 also assume mutual incoherence, albeit with a much weaker requirement, namely @math . Under this condition, they establish model selection guarantees for an ideal scaling of the non-zero coefficients @math . However, this result only holds with high probability for a random signal model' in which the non-zero coefficients @math have uniformly random signs.