Structure Learning with Continuous Optimization: A Sober Look and Beyond

Overview

• This paper examines when continuous optimization for directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure learning can and cannot perform well, and suggests ways to improve the search procedure.
• It analyzes the phenomenon observed by Reisach et al. (2021) that the remarkable performance of several continuous structure learning approaches is primarily driven by the agreement between the order of increasing marginal variances and the topological order.
• The paper provides counterexamples, justifications, and alternative explanations to show that this statement may not hold for cases with equal and non-equal noise variances.
• It also discusses concerns about nonconvexity, especially for the non-equal noise variances formulation, and demonstrates that recent advances in continuous structure learning fail to achieve improvement in this case.
• The findings suggest that future work should consider the non-equal noise variances formulation to handle more general settings and for a more comprehensive empirical evaluation.
• The paper also provides insights into other aspects of the search procedure, such as thresholding and sparsity, and their importance in the final solutions.

Plain English Explanation

This paper looks at how well continuous optimization methods can be used to learn the structure of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). DAGs are a type of graph that can represent the relationships between variables, and are commonly used in causal discovery and reinforcement learning.

The paper starts by examining a previous finding that the good performance of some continuous structure learning methods is mainly due to the order of the variables' variances matching the true causal order. However, the paper shows that this may not always be the case, providing counterexamples and alternative explanations.

The paper also highlights a potential issue with the non-equal noise variance formulation, where the objective function may be nonconvex, making it difficult to optimize. Recent advances in continuous structure learning have not been able to solve this problem.

The key takeaway is that future research on continuous DAG structure learning should consider more general settings, including cases with non-equal noise variances, to better understand the strengths and limitations of these methods. The paper also suggests that other aspects of the search procedure, like thresholding and sparsity, play an important role in the final solutions.

Technical Explanation

The paper investigates the performance of continuous optimization approaches for directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure learning. It analyzes the phenomenon observed by Reisach et al. (2021), where the remarkable performance of several continuous structure learning approaches was attributed to a high agreement between the order of increasing marginal variances and the topological order.

The paper provides counterexamples, justifications, and possible alternative explanations to show that this statement may not hold for cases with equal and non-equal noise variances. It demonstrates that nonconvexity may be a main concern, especially for the non-equal noise variances formulation, and that recent advances in continuous structure learning fail to achieve improvement in this case.

The paper's findings suggest that future work should take into account the non-equal noise variances formulation to handle more general settings and for a more comprehensive empirical evaluation. It also provides insights into other aspects of the search procedure, including thresholding and sparsity, and shows that they play an important role in the final solutions.

Critical Analysis

The paper raises important concerns about the limitations of current continuous optimization approaches for DAG structure learning. By providing counterexamples and alternative explanations, the authors challenge the prevailing view that the good performance of these methods is primarily driven by the alignment between the order of increasing marginal variances and the topological order.

The paper's focus on the non-equal noise variances formulation is particularly noteworthy, as it highlights a potential issue with the nonconvexity of the objective function in this case. This suggests that more advanced optimization techniques may be needed to effectively handle this more general setting.

However, the paper does not provide a comprehensive solution to the problem of continuous DAG structure learning. While it identifies limitations and areas for further research, the paper does not offer a clear path forward or a novel approach that can overcome the observed challenges.

Nonetheless, the critical analysis and the insights provided in the paper are valuable for the research community. By encouraging a more thorough examination of the assumptions and limitations of existing methods, the paper can help drive the development of more robust and reliable continuous DAG structure learning algorithms.

Conclusion

This paper takes a close look at the performance of continuous optimization approaches for directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure learning. It challenges a previous finding that the good performance of these methods is primarily driven by the alignment between the order of increasing marginal variances and the topological order, providing counterexamples and alternative explanations.

The paper also highlights the issue of nonconvexity, especially in the non-equal noise variances formulation, and demonstrates that recent advancements in continuous structure learning have not been able to solve this problem. These insights suggest that future research should consider more general settings, including non-equal noise variances, to better understand the strengths and limitations of continuous DAG structure learning approaches.

Additionally, the paper provides valuable insights into other aspects of the search procedure, such as thresholding and sparsity, and their importance in the final solutions. This information can help researchers design more effective and reliable continuous optimization algorithms for DAG structure learning, which has important applications in causal discovery and reinforcement learning.