Probabilistic linear solvers (PLSs) return probability distributions that quantify uncertainty due to limited computation in the solution of linear systems. The literature has traditionally distinguished between Bayesian PLSs, which condition a prior on information obtained from projections of the linear system, and probabilistic iterative methods (PIMs), which lift classical iterative solvers to probability space. In this work we show this dichotomy to be false: Bayesian PLSs are a special case of non-stationary affine PIMs. In addition, we prove that any realistic affine PIM is calibrated. These results motivate a focus on (non-stationary) affine PIMs, but their practical adoption has been limited by the significant manual effort required to implement them. To address this, we introduce affine tracing, an algorithmic framework that automatically constructs a PIM from a standard implementation of an affine iterative method by passing symbolic tracers through the computation to build an affine computational graph. We show how this graph can be transformed to compute posterior covariances, and how equality saturation can be used to perform algebraic simplifications required for computation under specific prior choices. We demonstrate the framework by automatically generating a probabilistic multigrid solver and evaluate its performance in the context of Gaussian process approximation.

The appendix includes the missing proofs, detailed discussions of some argument in the main body483 and more numerical experiments. We organize the appendix as follows:484 The proof of infeasibility condition (Theorem 3.2) is provided in Section B.485 Explanations on conditions derived in Theorem 3.2 are included in Section C.486 The proof of properties of the proposed model (r)LogSpecT (Proposition 3.4 & 3.6) is given487 in Section D and some additional properties are discussed.488 The truncated Hausdorff distance based proof details of Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.4 are489 given in Section E.490 Details of L-ADMM and its convergence analysis are in Section F.491 Additional experiments and discussions on synthetic data are included in Section G.492 Since the linear system (4) has no solution, we know from Farkas' lemma that the following system494 Hence, S is also a solution to (13). However, (13) does not have a solution. We can conclude that504 rSpecT is infeasible in this case.505

More recently, Newton-type methods using sparsified Hessian matrices have demonstrated promising results on OT computation, but there still remain a lot of unresolved open questions.