Bayesian Learning
Relevant based structure learning for feature selection
Feature selection is an important task in many problems occurring in pattern recognition, bioinformatics, machine learning and data mining applications. The feature selection approach enables us to reduce the computation burden and the falling accuracy effect of dealing with huge number of features in typical learning problems. There is a variety of techniques for feature selection in supervised learning problems based on different selection metrics. In this paper, we propose a novel unified framework for feature selection built on the graphical models and information theoretic tools. The proposed approach exploits the structure learning among features to select more relevant and less redundant features to the predictive modeling problem according to a primary novel likelihood based criterion. In line with the selection of the optimal subset of features through the proposed method, it provides us the Bayesian network classifier without the additional cost of model training on the selected subset of features. The optimal properties of our method are established through empirical studies and computational complexity analysis. Furthermore the proposed approach is evaluated on a bunch of benchmark datasets based on the well-known classification algorithms. Extensive experiments confirm the significant improvement of the proposed approach compared to the earlier works.
On the Consistency of the Likelihood Maximization Vertex Nomination Scheme: Bridging the Gap Between Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Graph Matching
Lyzinski, Vince, Levin, Keith, Fishkind, Donniell E., Priebe, Carey E.
Given a graph in which a few vertices are deemed interesting a priori, the vertex nomination task is to order the remaining vertices into a nomination list such that there is a concentration of interesting vertices at the top of the list. Previous work has yielded several approaches to this problem, with theoretical results in the setting where the graph is drawn from a stochastic block model (SBM), including a vertex nomination analogue of the Bayes optimal classifier. In this paper, we prove that maximum likelihood (ML)-based vertex nomination is consistent, in the sense that the performance of the ML-based scheme asymptotically matches that of the Bayes optimal scheme. We prove theorems of this form both when model parameters are known and unknown. Additionally, we introduce and prove consistency of a related, more scalable restricted-focus ML vertex nomination scheme. Finally, we incorporate vertex and edge features into ML-based vertex nomination and briefly explore the empirical effectiveness of this approach.
A Unified Approach for Learning the Parameters of Sum-Product Networks
Zhao, Han, Poupart, Pascal, Gordon, Geoff
We present a unified approach for learning the parameters of Sum-Product networks (SPNs). We prove that any complete and decomposable SPN is equivalent to a mixture of trees where each tree corresponds to a product of univariate distributions. Based on the mixture model perspective, we characterize the objective function when learning SPNs based on the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) principle and show that the optimization problem can be formulated as a signomial program. We construct two parameter learning algorithms for SPNs by using sequential monomial approximations (SMA) and the concave-convex procedure (CCCP), respectively. The two proposed methods naturally admit multiplicative updates, hence effectively avoiding the projection operation. With the help of the unified framework, we also show that, in the case of SPNs, CCCP leads to the same algorithm as Expectation Maximization (EM) despite the fact that they are different in general.
Global analysis of Expectation Maximization for mixtures of two Gaussians
Xu, Ji, Hsu, Daniel, Maleki, Arian
Expectation Maximization (EM) is among the most popular algorithms for estimating parameters of statistical models. However, EM, which is an iterative algorithm based on the maximum likelihood principle, is generally only guaranteed to find stationary points of the likelihood objective, and these points may be far from any maximizer. This article addresses this disconnect between the statistical principles behind EM and its algorithmic properties. Specifically, it provides a global analysis of EM for specific models in which the observations comprise an i.i.d. sample from a mixture of two Gaussians. This is achieved by (i) studying the sequence of parameters from idealized execution of EM in the infinite sample limit, and fully characterizing the limit points of the sequence in terms of the initial parameters; and then (ii) based on this convergence analysis, establishing statistical consistency (or lack thereof) for the actual sequence of parameters produced by EM.
Bridging AIC and BIC: a new criterion for autoregression
Ding, Jie, Tarokh, Vahid, Yang, Yuhong
We introduce a new criterion to determine the order of an autoregressive model fitted to time series data. It has the benefits of the two well-known model selection techniques, the Akaike information criterion and the Bayesian information criterion. When the data is generated from a finite order autoregression, the Bayesian information criterion is known to be consistent, and so is the new criterion. When the true order is infinity or suitably high with respect to the sample size, the Akaike information criterion is known to be efficient in the sense that its prediction performance is asymptotically equivalent to the best offered by the candidate models; in this case, the new criterion behaves in a similar manner. Different from the two classical criteria, the proposed criterion adaptively achieves either consistency or efficiency depending on the underlying true model. In practice where the observed time series is given without any prior information about the model specification, the proposed order selection criterion is more flexible and robust compared with classical approaches. Numerical results are presented demonstrating the adaptivity of the proposed technique when applied to various datasets.
Gaussian Processes for Dummies ·
It always amazes me how I can hear a statement uttered in the space of a few seconds about some aspect of machine learning that then takes me countless hours to understand. I first heard about Gaussian Processes on an episode of the Talking Machines podcast and thought it sounded like a really neat idea. I promptly procured myself a copy of the classic text on the subject, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning by Rasmussen and Williams, but my tenuous grasp on the Bayesian approach to machine learning meant I got stumped pretty quickly. That's when I began the journey I described in my last post, From both sides now: the math of linear regression. Gaussian Processes (GPs) are the natural next step in that journey as they provide an alternative approach to regression problems.
Softplus Regressions and Convex Polytopes
To construct flexible nonlinear predictive distributions, the paper introduces a family of softplus function based regression models that convolve, stack, or combine both operations by convolving countably infinite stacked gamma distributions, whose scales depend on the covariates. Generalizing logistic regression that uses a single hyperplane to partition the covariate space into two halves, softplus regressions employ multiple hyperplanes to construct a confined space, related to a single convex polytope defined by the intersection of multiple half-spaces or a union of multiple convex polytopes, to separate one class from the other. The gamma process is introduced to support the convolution of countably infinite (stacked) covariate-dependent gamma distributions. For Bayesian inference, Gibbs sampling derived via novel data augmentation and marginalization techniques is used to deconvolve and/or demix the highly complex nonlinear predictive distribution. Example results demonstrate that softplus regressions provide flexible nonlinear decision boundaries, achieving classification accuracies comparable to that of kernel support vector machine while requiring significant less computation for out-of-sample prediction.
Under the Hood of the Variational Autoencoder (in Prose and Code)
In Part I of this series, we introduced the theory and intuition behind the VAE, an exciting development in machine learning for combined generative modeling and inference--"machines that imagine and reason." To recap: VAEs put a probabilistic spin on the basic autoencoder paradigm--treating their inputs, hidden representations, and reconstructed outputs as probabilistic random variables within a directed graphical model. With this Bayesian perspective, the encoder becomes a variational inference network, mapping observed inputs to (approximate) posterior distributions over latent space, and the decoder becomes a generative network, capable of mapping arbitrary latent coordinates back to distributions over the original data space. The beauty of this setup is that we can take a principled Bayesian approach toward building systems with a rich internal "mental model" of the observed world, all by training a single, cleverly-designed deep neural network. These benefits derive from an enriched understanding of data as merely the tip of the iceberg--the observed result of an underlying causative probabilistic process.
Naive Bayes and Text Classification
Naive Bayes classifiers, a family of classifiers that are based on the popular Bayes' probability theorem, are known for creating simple yet well performing models, especially in the fields of document classification and disease prediction. In this first part of a series, we will take a look at the theory of naive Bayes classifiers and introduce the basic concepts of text classification. In following articles, we will implement those concepts to train a naive Bayes spam filter and apply naive Bayes to song classification based on lyrics. Starting more than half a century ago, scientists became very serious about addressing the question: "Can we build a model that learns from available data and automatically makes the right decisions and predictions?" Looking back, this sounds almost like a rhetoric question, and the answer can be found in numerous applications that are emerging from the fields of pattern classification, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. Data from various sensoring devices combined with powerful learning algorithms and domain knowledge led to many great inventions that we now take for granted in our everyday life: Internet queries via search engines like Google, text recognition at the post office, barcode scanners at the supermarket, the diagnosis of diseases, speech recognition by Siri or Google Now on our mobile phone, just to name a few.
About Feature Scaling and Normalization
The result of standardization (or Z-score normalization) is that the features will be rescaled so that they'll have the properties of a standard normal distribution with Standardizing the features so that they are centered around 0 with a standard deviation of 1 is not only important if we are comparing measurements that have different units, but it is also a general requirement for many machine learning algorithms. Intuitively, we can think of gradient descent as a prominent example (an optimization algorithm often used in logistic regression, SVMs, perceptrons, neural networks etc.); with features being on different scales, certain weights may update faster than others since the feature values play a role in the weight updates Other intuitive examples include K-Nearest Neighbor algorithms and clustering algorithms that use, for example, Euclidean distance measures – in fact, tree-based classifier are probably the only classifiers where feature scaling doesn't make a difference. In fact, the only family of algorithms that I could think of being scale-invariant are tree-based methods. Let's take the general CART decision tree algorithm. Without going into much depth regarding information gain and impurity measures, we can think of the decision as "is feature x_i some_val?"