We explore a recently proposed mixture model approach to understanding interactions between conflicting sensory cues. Alternative model formulations, differing in their sensory noise models and inference methods, are compared based on their fit to experimental data. Heavy-tailed sensory likelihoods yield a better description of the subjects' response behavior than standard Gaussian noise models. We study the underlying cause for this result, and then present several testable predictions of these models.

Suppose we train an animal in a conditioning experiment. Can one predict how a given animal, under given experimental conditions, would perform the task? Since various factors such as stress, motivation, genetic background, and previous errors in task performance can influence animal behaviour, this appears to be a very challenging aim. Reinforcement learning (RL) models have been successful in modeling animal (and human) behaviour, but their success has been limited because of uncertainty as to how to set meta-parameters (such as learning rate, exploitation-exploration balance and future reward discount factor) that strongly influence model performance. We show that a simple RL model whose metaparameters are controlled by an artificial neural network, fed with inputs such as stress, affective phenotype, previous task performance, and even neuromodulatory manipulations, can successfully predict mouse behaviour in the "hole-box" - a simple conditioning task. Our results also provide important insights on how stress and anxiety affect animal learning, performance accuracy, and discounting of future rewards, and on how noradrenergic systems can interact with these processes.

In this paper lower and upper bounds for the number of support vectors are derived for support vector machines (SVMs) based on the epsilon-insensitive loss function. It turns out that these bounds are asymptotically tight under mild assumptions on the data generating distribution. Finally, we briefly discuss a trade-off in epsilon between sparsity and accuracy if the SVM is used to estimate the conditional median.

Decision making lies at the very heart of many psychiatric diseases. It is also a central theoretical concern in a wide variety of fields and has undergone detailed, in-depth, analyses. We take as an example Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), applying insights from a Bayesian reinforcement learning framework. We focus on anhedonia and helplessness. Helplessness--a core element in the conceptualizations ofMDD that has lead to major advances in its treatment, pharmacological and neurobiological understanding--is formalized as a simple prior over the outcome entropy of actions in uncertain environments.

We consider the following instance of transfer learning: given a pair of regression problems, suppose that the regression coefficients share a partially common support, parameterized by the overlap fraction $\overlap$ between the two supports. This set-up suggests the use of $1, \infty$-regularized linear regression for recovering the support sets of both regression vectors. Our main contribution is to provide a sharp characterization of the sample complexity of this $1,\infty$ relaxation, exactly pinning down the minimal sample size $n$ required for joint support recovery as a function of the model dimension $\pdim$, support size $\spindex$ and overlap $\overlap \in [0,1]$. For measurement matrices drawn from standard Gaussian ensembles, we prove that the joint $1,\infty$-regularized method undergoes a phase transition characterized by order parameter $\orpar(\numobs, \pdim, \spindex, \overlap) = \numobs{(4 - 3 \overlap) s \log(p-(2-\overlap)s)}$. More precisely, the probability of successfully recovering both supports converges to $1$ for scalings such that $\orpar > 1$, and converges to $0$ to scalings for which $\orpar < 1$. An implication of this threshold is that use of $1, \infty$-regularization leads to gains in sample complexity if the overlap parameter is large enough ($\overlap > 2/3$), but performs worse than a naive approach if $\overlap < 2/3$. We illustrate the close agreement between these theoretical predictions, and the actual behavior in simulations. Thus, our results illustrate both the benefits and dangers associated with block-$1,\infty$ regularization in high-dimensional inference.

We introduce a new perspective on approximations to the maximum a posteriori (MAP) task in probabilistic graphical models, that is based on simplifying a given instance, and then tightening the approximation. First, we start with a structural relaxation of the original model. We then infer from the relaxation its deficiencies, and compensate for them. This perspective allows us to identify two distinct classes of approximations. First, we find that max-product belief propagation can be viewed as a way to compensate for a relaxation, based on a particular idealized case for exactness. We identify a second approach to compensation that is based on a more refined idealized case, resulting in a new approximation with distinct properties. We go on to propose a new class of algorithms that, starting with a relaxation, iteratively yields tighter approximations.

Since the development of loopy belief propagation, there has been considerable work on advancing the state of the art for approximate inference over distributions defined on discrete random variables. Improvements include guarantees of convergence, approximations that are provably more accurate, and bounds on the results of exact inference. However, extending these methods to continuous-valued systems has lagged behind. While several methods have been developed to use belief propagation on systems with continuous values, they have not as yet incorporated the recent advances for discrete variables. In this context we extend a recently proposed particle-based belief propagation algorithm to provide a general framework for adapting discrete message-passing algorithms to perform inference in continuous systems. The resulting algorithms behave similarly to their purely discrete counterparts, extending the benefits of these more advanced inference techniques to the continuous domain.

Stochastic relational models (SRMs) [15] provide a rich family of choices for learning and predicting dyadic data between two sets of entities. The models generalize matrixfactorization to a supervised learning problem that utilizes attributes of entities in a hierarchical Bayesian framework. Previously variational Bayes inference wasapplied for SRMs, which is, however, not scalable when the size of either entity set grows to tens of thousands. In this paper, we introduce a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm for equivalent models of SRMs in order to scale the computation to very large dyadic data sets. Both superior scalability and predictive accuracy are demonstrated on a collaborative filtering problem, which involves tens of thousands users and half million items.

Nonparametric Bayesian models provide a framework for flexible probabilistic modelling of complex datasets. Unfortunately, Bayesian inference methods often require high-dimensional averages and can be slow to compute, especially with the potentially unbounded representations associated with nonparametric models. We address the challenge of scaling nonparametric Bayesian inference to the increasingly large datasets found in real-world applications, focusing on the case of parallelising inference in the Indian Buffet Process (IBP). Our approach divides a large data set between multiple processors. The processors use message passing to compute likelihoods in an asynchronous, distributed fashion and to propagate statistics about the global Bayesian posterior. This novel MCMC sampler is the first parallel inference scheme for IBP-based models, scaling to datasets orders of magnitude larger than had previously been possible.

We prove that linear projections between distribution families with fixed first and second moments are surjective, regardless of dimension. We further extend this result to families that respect additional constraints, such as symmetry, unimodality and log-concavity. By combining our results with classic univariate inequalities, we provide new worst-case analyses for natural risk criteria arising in different fields. One discovery is that portfolio selection under the worst-case value-at-risk and conditional value-at-risk criteria yields identical portfolios.