Estimating Ising Models in Total Variation Distance

TL;DR

This paper develops a unified framework for efficiently estimating Ising models in total variation distance, covering broad classes of models and providing algorithms with optimal sample complexity.

Contribution

It introduces a unified analysis of the MPLE for two general classes of Ising models, enabling polynomial-time estimation with near-optimal sample complexity.

Findings

Polynomial-time algorithms for classes with bounded operator norm and MLSI.

Optimal or near-optimal sample complexity guarantees.

Applicability to various settings including models with bounded infinity norm.

Abstract

We consider the problem of estimating Ising models over $n$ variables in Total Variation (TV) distance, given $l$ independent samples from the model. While the statistical complexity of the problem is well-understood [DMR20], identifying computationally and statistically efficient algorithms has been challenging. In particular, remarkable progress has occurred in several settings, such as when the underlying graph is a tree [DP21, BGPV21], when the entries of the interaction matrix follow a Gaussian distribution [GM24, CK24], or when the bulk of its eigenvalues lie in a small interval [AJK+24, KLV24], but no unified framework for polynomial-time estimation in TV exists so far. Our main contribution is a unified analysis of the Maximum Pseudo-Likelihood Estimator (MPLE) for two general classes of Ising models. The first class includes models that have bounded operator norm and satisfy the Modified Log-Sobolev Inequality (MLSI), a functional inequality that was introduced to study the convergence of the associated Glauber dynamics to stationarity. In the second class of models, the interaction matrix has bounded infinity norm (or bounded width), which is the most common assumption in the literature for structure learning of Ising models. We show how our general results for these classes yield polynomial-time algorithms and optimal or near-optimal sample complexity guarantees in a variety of settings. Our proofs employ a variety of tools from tensorization inequalities to measure decompositions and concentration bounds.