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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

In many common interactive scenarios, participants lack information about other participants, and specifically about the preferences of other participants. In this work, we model an extreme case of incomplete information, which we term games with type ambiguity, where a participant lacks even information enabling him to form a belief on the preferences of others. Under type ambiguity, one cannot analyze the scenario using the commonly used Bayesian framework, and therefore he needs to model the participants using a different decision model. In this work, we present the ${\rm MINthenMAX}$ decision model under ambiguity. This model is a refinement of Wald's MiniMax principle, which we show to be too coarse for games with type ambiguity. We characterize ${\rm MINthenMAX}$ as the finest refinement of the MiniMax principle that satisfies three properties we claim are necessary for games with type ambiguity. This prior-less approach we present her also follows the common practice in computer science of worst-case analysis. Finally, we define and analyze the corresponding equilibrium concept assuming all players follow ${\rm MINthenMAX}$. We demonstrate this equilibrium by applying it to two common economic scenarios: coordination games and bilateral trade. We show that in both scenarios, an equilibrium in pure strategies always exists and we analyze the equilibria.

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.

In the last few months, I have had several people contact me about their enthusiasm for venturing into the world of data science and using Machine Learning (ML) techniques to probe statistical regularities and build impeccable data-driven products. However, I have observed that some actually lack the necessary mathematical intuition and framework to get useful results. This is the main reason I decided to write this blog post. Recently, there has been an upsurge in the availability of many easy-to-use machine and deep learning packages such as scikit-learn, Weka, Tensorflow, R-caret etc. Machine Learning theory is a field that intersects statistical, probabilistic, computer science and algorithmic aspects arising from learning iteratively from data and finding hidden insights which can be used to build intelligent applications. Despite the immense possibilities of Machine and Deep Learning, a thorough mathematical understanding of many of these techniques is necessary for a good grasp of the inner workings of the algorithms and getting good results.

Arthur C. Clarke famously stated that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." No current technology embodies this statement more than neural networks and deep learning. And like any good magic it not only dazzles and inspires but also puts fear into people's hearts. One known property of artificial neural networks (ANNs) is that they are universal function approximators. This means that any mathematical function can be represented by a neural network.