MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396730968

Learning to Discover Graphical Model Structures

2016· preprint· en· W2396730968 on OpenAlexaff
Eugene Belilovsky, Kyle Kastner, Gaël Varoquaux, Matthew B. Blaschko

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphical modelComputer sciencePrior probabilityLeverage (statistics)InferenceMachine learningEstimatorArtificial intelligenceSynthetic dataGraphAlgorithmData miningTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsBayesian probability
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider structure discovery of undirected graphical models from observational data. Inferring likely structures from few examples is a complex task often requiring the formulation of priors and sophisticated inference procedures. In the setting of Gaussian Graphical Models (GGMs) a popular estimator is a penalized maximum likelihood objective on the precision matrix. Adapting this objective to capture domain-specific knowledge as priors or a new data likelihood requires great effort. In addition, structure recovery is a very indirect consequence of the data-fit term. By contrast, it may be easier to generate training samples of data that arise from graphs with the desired properties. We propose here to leverage this latter source of information in order to learn a function that maps from empirical covariance matrices to estimated graph structures. Learning this function brings two benefits: it implicitly models the desired structure or sparsity properties to form suitable priors, and it can more directly be tailored to the specific problem of edge structure discovery. We apply this framework to several critical real world problems in structure discovery and show that it can be competitive to standard approaches such as graphical lasso, at a fraction of the execution speed. We use convolutional neural networks to parametrize our estimators due to the compositional block structure of matrix inversion. Experimentally, our learnable graph-discovery method trained on synthetic data generalizes well to different data: identifying relevant edges in real data, completely unknown at training time. We find that on genetics, brain imaging, and simulation data we obtain competitive (and often superior) performance, compared with analytical methods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.137 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207