Goto

Collaborating Authors

 Bayesian Learning


How Bayesian Inference Works

@machinelearnbot

Bayesian inference is a way to get sharper predictions from your data. It's particularly useful when you don't have as much data as you would like and want to juice every last bit of predictive strength from it. Although it is sometimes described with reverence, Bayesian inference isn't magic or mystical. And even though the math under the hood can get dense, the concepts behind it are completely accessible. In brief, Bayesian inference lets you draw stronger conclusions from your data by folding in what you already know about the answer. Bayesian inference is based on the ideas of Thomas Bayes, a nonconformist Presbyterian minister in London about 300 years ago. He wrote two books, one on theology, and one on probability. His work included his now famous Bayes Theorem in raw form, which has since been applied to the problem of inference, the technical term for educated guessing. The popularity of Bayes' ideas was aided immeasurably by another minister, Richard Price.


Data Science Dictionary

@machinelearnbot

The idea of cross-validation is to split the data into N subsets, to put one subset aside, to estimate parameters of the model from the remaining N-1 subsets, and to use the retained subset to estimate the error of the model. Such a process is repeated N times - with each of the N subsets being used as the validation set . Then the values of the errors obtained in such N steps are combined to provide the final estimate of the model error. The cross-validation is used in various classification and prediction procedures, such as regression analysis, discriminant analysis, neural networks and classification and regression trees (CART) . The goal is to improve the quality of the decision that is made from the outcome of the study on the basis of statistical methods, and to ensure that maximum information is obtained from scarce experimental data.


Introduction to Machine Learning for Developers

#artificialintelligence

Today's developers often hear about leveraging machine learning algorithms in order to build more intelligent applications, but many don't know where to start. One of the most important aspects of developing smart applications is to understand the underlying machine learning models, even if you aren't the person building them. Whether you are integrating a recommendation system into your app or building a chat bot, this guide will help you get started in understanding the basics of machine learning. This introduction to machine learning and list of resources is adapted from my October 2016 talk at ACT-W, a women's tech conference. While this is only a brief definition, machine learning means we can use statistical models and probabilistic algorithms to answer questions so we can make informative decisions based on our data.


Unifying Count-Based Exploration and Intrinsic Motivation

arXiv.org Machine Learning

We consider an agent's uncertainty about its environment and the problem of generalizing this uncertainty across observations. Specifically, we focus on the problem of exploration in non-tabular reinforcement learning. Drawing inspiration from the intrinsic motivation literature, we use density models to measure uncertainty, and propose a novel algorithm for deriving a pseudo-count from an arbitrary density model. This technique enables us to generalize count-based exploration algorithms to the non-tabular case. We apply our ideas to Atari 2600 games, providing sensible pseudo-counts from raw pixels. We transform these pseudo-counts into intrinsic rewards and obtain significantly improved exploration in a number of hard games, including the infamously difficult Montezuma's Revenge.


Using Social Dynamics to Make Individual Predictions: Variational Inference with a Stochastic Kinetic Model

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Social dynamics is concerned primarily with interactions among individuals and the resulting group behaviors, modeling the temporal evolution of social systems via the interactions of individuals within these systems. In particular, the availability of large-scale data from social networks and sensor networks offers an unprecedented opportunity to predict state-changing events at the individual level. Examples of such events include disease transmission, opinion transition in elections, and rumor propagation. Unlike previous research focusing on the collective effects of social systems, this study makes efficient inferences at the individual level. In order to cope with dynamic interactions among a large number of individuals, we introduce the stochastic kinetic model to capture adaptive transition probabilities and propose an efficient variational inference algorithm the complexity of which grows linearly --- rather than exponentially --- with the number of individuals. To validate this method, we have performed epidemic-dynamics experiments on wireless sensor network data collected from more than ten thousand people over three years. The proposed algorithm was used to track disease transmission and predict the probability of infection for each individual. Our results demonstrate that this method is more efficient than sampling while nonetheless achieving high accuracy.


EM Algorithm and Stochastic Control in Economics

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Generalising the idea of the classical EM algorithm that is widely used for computing maximum likelihood estimates, we propose an EM-Control (EM-C) algorithm for solving multi-period finite time horizon stochastic control problems. The new algorithm sequentially updates the control policies in each time period using Monte Carlo simulation in a forward-backward manner; in other words, the algorithm goes forward in simulation and backward in optimization in each iteration. Similar to the EM algorithm, the EM-C algorithm has the monotonicity of performance improvement in each iteration, leading to good convergence properties. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the algorithm by solving stochastic control problems in the monopoly pricing of perishable assets and in the study of real business cycle.


Communication-Efficient Distributed Statistical Inference

arXiv.org Machine Learning

We present a Communication-efficient Surrogate Likelihood (CSL) framework for solving distributed statistical inference problems. CSL provides a communication-efficient surrogate to the global likelihood that can be used for low-dimensional estimation, high-dimensional regularized estimation and Bayesian inference. For low-dimensional estimation, CSL provably improves upon naive averaging schemes and facilitates the construction of confidence intervals. For high-dimensional regularized estimation, CSL leads to a minimax-optimal estimator with controlled communication cost. For Bayesian inference, CSL can be used to form a communication-efficient quasi-posterior distribution that converges to the true posterior. This quasi-posterior procedure significantly improves the computational efficiency of MCMC algorithms even in a non-distributed setting. We present both theoretical analysis and experiments to explore the properties of the CSL approximation.


Estimating Causal Direction and Confounding of Two Discrete Variables

arXiv.org Machine Learning

We propose a method to classify the causal relationship between two discrete variables given only the joint distribution of the variables, acknowledging that the method is subject to an inherent baseline error. We assume that the causal system is acyclicity, but we do allow for hidden common causes. Our algorithm presupposes that the probability distributions $P(C)$ of a cause $C$ is independent from the probability distribution $P(E\mid C)$ of the cause-effect mechanism. While our classifier is trained with a Bayesian assumption of flat hyperpriors, we do not make this assumption about our test data. This work connects to recent developments on the identifiability of causal models over continuous variables under the assumption of "independent mechanisms". Carefully-commented Python notebooks that reproduce all our experiments are available online at http://vision.caltech.edu/~kchalupk/code.html.


Exact Inference Techniques for the Analysis of Bayesian Attack Graphs

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Attack graphs are a powerful tool for security risk assessment by analysing network vulnerabilities and the paths attackers can use to compromise network resources. The uncertainty about the attacker's behaviour makes Bayesian networks suitable to model attack graphs to perform static and dynamic analysis. Previous approaches have focused on the formalization of attack graphs into a Bayesian model rather than proposing mechanisms for their analysis. In this paper we propose to use efficient algorithms to make exact inference in Bayesian attack graphs, enabling the static and dynamic network risk assessments. To support the validity of our approach we have performed an extensive experimental evaluation on synthetic Bayesian attack graphs with different topologies, showing the computational advantages in terms of time and memory use of the proposed techniques when compared to existing approaches.


How Bayesian Inference Works

@machinelearnbot

Brandon is an author and deep learning developer. He has worked as Principal Data Scientist at Microsoft, as well as for DuPont Pioneer and Sandia National Laboratories. Brandon earned a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Bayesian inference is a way to get sharper predictions from your data. It's particularly useful when you don't have as much data as you would like and want to juice every last bit of predictive strength from it. Although it is sometimes described with reverence, Bayesian inference isn't magic or mystical. And even though the math under the hood can get dense, the concepts behind it are completely accessible. In brief, Bayesian inference lets you draw stronger conclusions from your data by folding in what you already know about the answer. Bayesian inference is based on the ideas of Thomas Bayes, a nonconformist Presbyterian minister in London about 300 years ago. He wrote two books, one on theology, and one on probability.