MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948340529 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.03329

Sparse Variational Inference: Bayesian Coresets from Scratch

2019· preprint· en· W2948340529 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Campbell, Boyan Beronov

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInferenceScalabilityAutomatic summarizationBayesian inferenceBayesian probabilityApproximate inferenceMachine learningAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematicsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation of automated inference algorithms in Bayesian statistics has provided practitioners newfound access to fast, reproducible data analysis and powerful statistical models. Designing automated methods that are also both computationally scalable and theoretically sound, however, remains a significant challenge. Recent work on Bayesian coresets takes the approach of compressing the dataset before running a standard inference algorithm, providing both scalability and guarantees on posterior approximation error. But the automation of past coreset methods is limited because they depend on the availability of a reasonable coarse posterior approximation, which is difficult to specify in practice. In the present work we remove this requirement by formulating coreset construction as sparsity-constrained variational inference within an exponential family. This perspective leads to a novel construction via greedy optimization, and also provides a unifying information-geometric view of present and past methods. The proposed Riemannian coreset construction algorithm is fully automated, requiring no problem-specific inputs aside from the probabilistic model and dataset. In addition to being significantly easier to use than past methods, experiments demonstrate that past coreset constructions are fundamentally limited by the fixed coarse posterior approximation; in contrast, the proposed algorithm is able to continually improve the coreset, providing state-of-the-art Bayesian dataset summarization with orders-of-magnitude reduction in KL divergence to the exact posterior.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207