اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدMeasuring the sensitivity of Gaussian processes to kernel choice
284
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Gaussian processes (GPs) are used to make medical and scientific decisions, including in cardiac care and monitoring of carbon dioxide emissions. But the choice of GP kernel is often somewhat arbitrary. In particular, uncountably many kernels typically align with qualitative prior knowledge (e.g. function smoothness or stationarity). But in practice, data analysts choose among a handful of convenient standard kernels (e.g. squared exponential). In the present work, we ask: Would decisions made with a GP differ under other, qualitatively interchangeable kernels? We show how to formulate this sensitivity analysis as a constrained optimization problem over a finite-dimensional space. We can then use standard optimizers to identify substantive changes in relevant decisions made with a GP. We demonstrate in both synthetic and real-world examples that decisions made with a GP can exhibit substantial sensitivity to kernel choice, even when prior draws are qualitatively interchangeable to a user.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Gaussian processes (GPs) provide a gold standard for performance in online settings, such as sample-efficient control and black box optimization, where we need to update a posterior distribution as we acquire data in a sequential fashion. However, up
dating a GP posterior to accommodate even a single new observation after having observed $n$ points incurs at least $O(n)$ computations in the exact setting. We show how to use structured kernel interpolation to efficiently recycle computations for constant-time $O(1)$ online updates with respect to the number of points $n$, while retaining exact inference. We demonstrate the promise of our approach in a range of online regression and classification settings, Bayesian optimization, and active sampling to reduce error in malaria incidence forecasting. Code is available at https://github.com/wjmaddox/online_gp.
This paper is an attempt to bridge the conceptual gaps between researchers working on the two widely used approaches based on positive definite kernels: Bayesian learning or inference using Gaussian processes on the one side, and frequentist kernel m
ethods based on reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces on the other. It is widely known in machine learning that these two formalisms are closely related; for instance, the estimator of kernel ridge regression is identical to the posterior mean of Gaussian process regression. However, they have been studied and developed almost independently by two essentially separate communities, and this makes it difficult to seamlessly transfer results between them. Our aim is to overcome this potential difficulty. To this end, we review several old and new results and concepts from either side, and juxtapose algorithmic quantities from each framework to highlight close similarities. We also provide discussions on subtle philosophical and theoretical differences between the two approaches.
Gaussian process regression is a widely-applied method for function approximation and uncertainty quantification. The technique has gained popularity recently in the machine learning community due to its robustness and interpretability. The mathemati
cal methods we discuss in this paper are an extension of the Gaussian-process framework. We are proposing advanced kernel designs that only allow for functions with certain desirable characteristics to be elements of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) that underlies all kernel methods and serves as the sample space for Gaussian process regression. These desirable characteristics reflect the underlying physics; two obvious examples are symmetry and periodicity constraints. In addition, non-stationary kernel designs can be defined in the same framework to yield flexible multi-task Gaussian processes. We will show the impact of advanced kernel designs on Gaussian processes using several synthetic and two scientific data sets. The results show that including domain knowledge, communicated through advanced kernel designs, has a significant impact on the accuracy and relevance of the function approximation.
We define deep kernel processes in which positive definite Gram matrices are progressively transformed by nonlinear kernel functions and by sampling from (inverse) Wishart distributions. Remarkably, we find that deep Gaussian processes (DGPs), Bayesi
an neural networks (BNNs), infinite BNNs, and infinite BNNs with bottlenecks can all be written as deep kernel processes. For DGPs the equivalence arises because the Gram matrix formed by the inner product of features is Wishart distributed, and as we show, standard isotropic kernels can be written entirely in terms of this Gram matrix -- we do not need knowledge of the underlying features. We define a tractable deep kernel process, the deep inverse Wishart process, and give a doubly-stochastic inducing-point variational inference scheme that operates on the Gram matrices, not on the features, as in DGPs. We show that the deep inverse Wishart process gives superior performance to DGPs and infinite BNNs on standard fully-connected baselines.
Gaussian process models are flexible, Bayesian non-parametric approaches to regression. Properties of multivariate Gaussians mean that they can be combined linearly in the manner of additive models and via a link function (like in generalized linear
models) to handle non-Gaussian data. However, the link function formalism is restrictive, link functions are always invertible and must convert a parameter of interest to a linear combination of the underlying processes. There are many likelihoods and models where a non-linear combination is more appropriate. We term these more general models Chained Gaussian Processes: the transformation of the GPs to the likelihood parameters will not generally be invertible, and that implies that linearisation would only be possible with multiple (localized) links, i.e. a chain. We develop an approximate inference procedure for Chained GPs that is scalable and applicable to any factorized likelihood. We demonstrate the approximation on a range of likelihood functions.
الأسئلة المقترحة
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
