Learn From Thy Neighbor: Parallel-Chain and Regional Adaptive MCMC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting with the seminal paper of Haario, Saksman, and Tamminen (Haario, Saksman, and Tamminen 2001), a substantial amount of work has been done to validate adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms. In this paper we focus on two practical aspects of adaptive Metropolis samplers. First, we draw attention to the deficient performance of standard adaptation when the target distribution is multimodal. We propose a parallel chain adaptation strategy that incorporates multiple Markov chains which are run in parallel. Second, we note that the current adaptive MCMC paradigm implicitly assumes that the adaptation is uniformly efficient on all regions of the state space. However, in many practical instances, different “optimal” kernels are needed in different regions of the state space. We propose here a regional adaptation algorithm in which we account for possible errors made in defining the adaptation regions. This corresponds to the more realistic case in which one does not know exactly the optimal regions for adaptation. The methods focus on the random walk Metropolis sampling algorithm but their scope is much wider. We provide theoretical justification for the two adaptive approaches using the existent theory build for adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo. We illustrate the performance of the methods using simulations and analyze a mixture model for real data using an algorithm that combines the two approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".