The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MAP Estimation Via Agreement on Trees: Message-Passing and Linear Programming
Abstract
We develop and analyze methods for computing provably optimal maximum a posteriori probability (MAP) configurations for a subclass of Markov random fields defined on graphs with cycles. By decomposing the original distribution into a convex combination of tree-structured distributions, we obtain an upper bound on the optimal value of the original problem (i.e., the log probability of the MAP assignment) in terms of the combined optimal values of the tree problems. We prove that this upper bound is tight if and only if all the tree distributions share an optimal configuration in common. An important implication is that any such shared configuration must also be a MAP configuration for the original distribution. Next we develop two approaches to attempting to obtain tight upper bounds: a) a tree-relaxed linear program (LP), which is derived from the Lagrangian dual of the upper bounds; and b) a tree-reweighted max-product message-passing algorithm that is related to but distinct from the max-product algorithm. In this way, we establish a connection between a certain LP relaxation of the mode-finding problem and a reweighted form of the max-product (min-sum) message-passing algorithm.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lauritzen, S. L. (1996) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198522195.001.0001 · Cited by 2,976
Biggs, N. (1974) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511608704 · Cited by 2,940
Cited by
Collective Classification in Network Data
Sen, P., Namata, G., Bilgic, M., Getoor, L., Gallagher, B., & Eliassi‐Rad, T. (2008) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2157 · Cited by 3,293
MSM: a new flexible framework for Multimodal Surface Matching
Robinson, E. C., Jbabdi, S., Glasser, M. F., Andersson, J., Burgess, G. C., Harms, M. P., Smith, S. M., Van Essen, D. C., & Jenkinson, M. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.069 · Cited by 640
Ghamisi, P., Maggiori, E., Li, S., Souza, R., Tarablaka, Y., Moser, G., De Giorgi, A., Fang, L., Chen, Y., Chi, M., et al. (2018) · IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine · doi:10.1109/mgrs.2018.2854840 · Cited by 325
A study on continuous max-flow and min-cut approaches
Yuan, J., Bae, E., & Tai, X.-C. (2010) · 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2010.5539903 · Cited by 237
Discriminative Models for Multi-Class Object Layout
Desai, C., Ramanan, D., & Fowlkes, C. C. (2011) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-011-0439-x · Cited by 208
Metadata
- Authors
- Wainwright, M. J., Jaakkola, T. S., & Willsky, A. S.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3697-3717
- ISSN
- 0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108619558
- Cited by
- 654
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 35.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MAP Estimation Via Agreement on Trees: Message-Passing and Linear Programming. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tit.2005.856938
- The paper
- Wainwright, M. J., Jaakkola, T. S., & Willsky, A. S. (2005). MAP Estimation Via Agreement on Trees: Message-Passing and Linear Programming. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/tit.2005.856938
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.