Bidirectional Information Flow (BIF) -- A Sample Efficient Hierarchical Gaussian Process for Bayesian Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hierarchical Gaussian Process (H-GP) models divide problems into different subtasks, allowing for different models to address each part, making them well-suited for problems with inherent hierarchical structure. However, typical H-GP models do not fully take advantage of this structure, only sending information up or down the hierarchy. This one-way coupling limits sample efficiency and slows convergence. We propose Bidirectional Information Flow (BIF), an efficient H-GP framework that establishes bidirectional information exchange between parent and child models in H-GPs for online training. BIF retains the modular structure of hierarchical models - the parent combines subtask knowledge from children GPs - while introducing top-down feedback to continually refine children models during online learning. This mutual exchange improves sample efficiency, enables robust training, and allows modular reuse of learned subtask models. BIF outperforms conventional H-GP Bayesian Optimization methods, achieving up to 85% and 5x higher $R^2$ scores for the parent and children respectively, on synthetic and real-world neurostimulation optimization tasks.
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 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".