1: \begin{abstract}

2: The lasso has become an important practical tool for high dimensional regression

3: as well as the object of intense theoretical investigation.

4: But despite the availability of efficient algorithms, the lasso remains computationally

5: demanding in regression problems where the number of variables

6: vastly exceeds the number of data points.

7: A much older method, marginal regression, largely displaced by the lasso,

8: offers a promising alternative in this case.

9: Computation for marginal regression is practical even when the dimension is very high.

10: In this paper, we study the relative performance of the lasso and marginal regression for regression problems

11: in three different regimes: (a)~exact reconstruction in the noise-free and noisy

12: cases when design and coefficients are fixed, (b)~exact reconstruction in the noise-free

13: case when the design is fixed but the coefficients are random,

14: and (c)~reconstruction in the noisy case where performance is measured by the number

15: of coefficients whose sign is incorrect.

16: 

17: In the first regime, we compare the conditions for exact reconstruction of the two procedures, 

18: find examples where each procedure succeeds while the other fails, and characterize the advantages and disadvantages of each.

19: In the second regime, we derive   conditions under which marginal regression  will provide exact reconstruction with high probability.

20: And in the third regime, we derive rates of convergence for the procedures

21: and offer a new partitioning of the ``phase diagram,'' 

22: that shows when exact or Hamming reconstruction is effective.

23: 

24: In addition to theoretical investigation, 

25: we present simulations showing that in practice,

26: marginal regression and the lasso can have comparable performance,

27: while the computational advantages of marginal regression make

28: it feasible for much larger problems.

29: 

30: \end{abstract}

31: