MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1607933843 · doi:10.1080/10618600.2016.1237363

Divide-and-Conquer With Sequential Monte Carlo

2016· article· en· W1607933843 on OpenAlexaff
Fredrik Lindsten, Adam M. Johansen, Christian A. Naesseth, Bonnie Kirkpatrick, Thomas B. Schön, John A. D. Aston, Alexandre Bouchard‐Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsDivide and conquer algorithmsComputer scienceProbabilistic logicGraphical modelInferenceMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmClass (philosophy)Theoretical computer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel class of Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) algorithms, appropriate for inference in probabilistic graphical models. This class of algorithms adopts a divide-and-conquer approach based upon an auxiliary tree-structured decomposition of the model of interest, turning the overall inferential task into a collection of recursively solved subproblems. The proposed method is applicable to a broad class of probabilistic graphical models, including models with loops. Unlike a standard SMC sampler, the proposed divide-and-conquer SMC employs multiple independent populations of weighted particles, which are resampled, merged, and propagated as the method progresses. We illustrate empirically that this approach can outperform standard methods in terms of the accuracy of the posterior expectation and marginal likelihood approximations. Divide-and-conquer SMC also opens up novel parallel implementation options and the possibility of concentrating the computational effort on the most challenging subproblems. We demonstrate its performance on a Markov random field and on a hierarchical logistic regression problem. Supplementary materials including proofs and additional numerical results are available online.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational and Graphical StatisticsSame topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207