Paper detail

Hardness of Identity Testing for Restricted Boltzmann Machines and Potts models

We study identity testing for restricted Boltzmann machines (RBMs), and more generally for undirected graphical models. Given sample access to the Gibbs distribution corresponding to an unknown or hidden model $M^*$ and given an explicit model $M$, can we distinguish if either $M = M^*$ or if they are (statistically) far apart? Daskalakis et al. (2018) presented a polynomial-time algorithm for identity testing for the ferromagnetic (attractive) Ising model. In contrast, for the antiferromagnetic (repulsive) Ising model, Bezáková et al. (2019) proved that unless $RP=NP$ there is no identity testing algorithm when $βd=ω(\log{n})$, where $d$ is the maximum degree of the visible graph and $β$ is the largest edge weight in absolute value. We prove analogous hardness results for RBMs (i.e., mixed Ising models on bipartite graphs), even when there are no latent variables or an external field. Specifically, we show that if $RP \neq NP$, then when $βd=ω(\log{n})$ there is no polynomial-time algorithm for identity testing for RBMs; when $βd =O(\log{n})$ there is an efficient identity testing algorithm that utilizes the structure learning algorithm of Klivans and Meka (2017). In addition, we prove similar lower bounds for purely ferromagnetic RBMs with inconsistent external fields, and for the ferromagnetic Potts model. Previous hardness results for identity testing of Bezáková et al. (2019) utilized the hardness of finding the maximum cuts, which corresponds to the ground states of the antiferromagnetic Ising model. Since RBMs are on bipartite graphs such an approach is not feasible. We instead introduce a general methodology to reduce from the corresponding approximate counting problem and utilize the phase transition that is exhibited by RBMs and the mean-field Potts model.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.

Hardness of Identity Testing for Restricted Boltzmann Machines and Potts models | BZPEER | BZPEER