Diffusion models (DMs) have recently shown outstanding capability in modeling complex image distributions, making them expressive image priors for solving Bayesian inverse problems. However, most existing DM-based methods rely on approximations in the generative process to be generic to different inverse problems, leading to inaccurate sample distributions that deviate from the target posterior defined within the Bayesian framework. To harness the generative power of DMs while avoiding such approximations, we propose a Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm that performs posterior sampling for general inverse problems by reducing it to sampling the posterior of a Gaussian denoising problem. Crucially, we leverage a general DM formulation as a unified interface that allows for rigorously solving the denoising problem with a range of state-of-the-art DMs. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method on six inverse problems (three linear and three nonlinear), including a real-world black hole imaging problem. Experimental results indicate that our proposed method offers more accurate reconstructions and posterior estimation compared to existing DM-based imaging inverse methods.

This paper investigates sparse high-dimensional linear regression, particularly examining the properties of the posterior under conditions of random design and unknown error variance. We provide consistency results for the posterior and analyze its concentration rates, demonstrating adaptiveness to the unknown sparsity level of the regression coefficient vector. Furthermore, we extend our investigation to establish concentration outcomes for parameter estimation using specific distance measures. These findings are in line with recent discoveries in frequentist studies. Additionally, by employing techniques to address model misspecification through a fractional posterior, we broaden our analysis through oracle inequalities to encompass the critical aspect of model misspecification for the regular posterior. Our novel findings are demonstrated using two different types of sparsity priors: a shrinkage prior and a spike-and-slab prior.

Real-world decision-making requires grappling with a perpetual lack of data as environments change; intelligent agents must comprehend uncertainty and actively gather information to resolve it. We propose a new framework for learning bandit algorithms from massive historical data, which we demonstrate in a cold-start recommendation problem. First, we use historical data to pretrain an autoregressive model to predict a sequence of repeated feedback/rewards (e.g., responses to news articles shown to different users over time). In learning to make accurate predictions, the model implicitly learns an informed prior based on rich action features (e.g., article headlines) and how to sharpen beliefs as more rewards are gathered (e.g., clicks as each article is recommended). At decision-time, we autoregressively sample (impute) an imagined sequence of rewards for each action, and choose the action with the largest average imputed reward. Far from a heuristic, our approach is an implementation of Thompson sampling (with a learned prior), a prominent active exploration algorithm. We prove our pretraining loss directly controls online decision-making performance, and we demonstrate our framework on a news recommendation task where we integrate end-to-end fine-tuning of a pretrained language model to process news article headline text to improve performance.

Balancing the exploration-exploitation trade-off is a fundamental dilemma in reinforcement learning (RL). This issue has been systemically addressed in two main approaches, namely optimism in the face of uncertainty (OFU) and Thompson sampling (TS). The methods using OFU first construct confidence sets for the environment or model parameters given the samples observed so far. After finding the reward-maximizing or optimistic parameters within the confidence set, an optimal policy with respect to the parameters is constructed and executed [1]. Various algorithms using OFU are shown to have strong theoretical guarantees in bandits [2]. On the other hand, TS is a Bayesian method in which environment or model parameters are sampled from the posterior that is updated along the process using samples and a prior, and an optimal policy with respect to the sampled parameter is constructed and executed [3].

Explainable AI Planning (XAIP) aims to develop AI agents that can effectively explain their decisions and actions to human users, fostering trust and facilitating human-AI collaboration. A key challenge in XAIP is model reconciliation, which seeks to align the mental models of AI agents and humans. While existing approaches often assume a known and deterministic human model, this simplification may not capture the complexities and uncertainties of real-world interactions. In this paper, we propose a novel framework that enables AI agents to learn and update a probabilistic human model through argumentation-based dialogues. Our approach incorporates trust-based and certainty-based update mechanisms, allowing the agent to refine its understanding of the human's mental state based on the human's expressed trust in the agent's arguments and certainty in their own arguments. We employ a probability weighting function inspired by prospect theory to capture the relationship between trust and perceived probability, and use a Bayesian approach to update the agent's probability distribution over possible human models. We conduct a human-subject study to empirically evaluate the effectiveness of our approach in an argumentation scenario, demonstrating its ability to capture the dynamics of human belief formation and adaptation.

We derive a novel, provably robust, and closed-form Bayesian update rule for online filtering in state-space models in the presence of outliers and misspecified measurement models. Our method combines generalised Bayesian inference with filtering methods such as the extended and ensemble Kalman filter. We use the former to show robustness and the latter to ensure computational efficiency in the case of nonlinear models. Our method matches or outperforms other robust filtering methods (such as those based on variational Bayes) at a much lower computational cost. We show this empirically on a range of filtering problems with outlier measurements, such as object tracking, state estimation in high-dimensional chaotic systems, and online learning of neural networks.

In this paper, we address the problem of cost-sensitive multi-fidelity Bayesian Optimization (BO) for efficient hyperparameter optimization (HPO). Specifically, we assume a scenario where users want to early-stop the BO when the performance improvement is not satisfactory with respect to the required computational cost. Motivated by this scenario, we introduce utility, which is a function predefined by each user and describes the trade-off between cost and performance of BO. This utility function, combined with our novel acquisition function and stopping criterion, allows us to dynamically choose for each BO step the best configuration that we expect to maximally improve the utility in future, and also automatically stop the BO around the maximum utility. Further, we improve the sample efficiency of existing learning curve (LC) extrapolation methods with transfer learning, while successfully capturing the correlations between different configurations to develop a sensible surrogate function for multi-fidelity BO. We validate our algorithm on various LC datasets and found it outperform all the previous multi-fidelity BO and transfer-BO baselines we consider, achieving significantly better trade-off between cost and performance of BO.

A common way to evaluate a dataset in ML involves training a model on this dataset and assessing the model's performance on a test set. However, this approach has two issues: (1) it may incentivize undesirable data manipulation in data marketplaces, as the self-interested data providers seek to modify the dataset to maximize their evaluation scores; (2) it may select datasets that overfit to potentially small test sets. We propose a new data valuation method that provably guarantees the following: data providers always maximize their expected score by truthfully reporting their observed data. Any manipulation of the data, including but not limited to data duplication, adding random data, data removal, or re-weighting data from different groups, cannot increase their expected score. Our method, following the paradigm of proper scoring rules, measures the pointwise mutual information (PMI) of the test dataset and the evaluated dataset. However, computing the PMI of two datasets is challenging. We introduce a novel PMI measuring method that greatly improves tractability within Bayesian machine learning contexts. This is accomplished through a new characterization of PMI that relies solely on the posterior probabilities of the model parameter at an arbitrarily selected value. Finally, we support our theoretical results with simulations and further test the effectiveness of our data valuation method in identifying the top datasets among multiple data providers. Interestingly, our method outperforms the standard approach of selecting datasets based on the trained model's test performance, suggesting that our truthful valuation score can also be more robust to overfitting.

With the advent of AI technologies, humans and robots are increasingly teaming up to perform collaborative tasks. To enable smooth and effective collaboration, the topic of value alignment (operationalized herein as the degree of dynamic goal alignment within a task) between the robot and the human is gaining increasing research attention. Prior literature on value alignment makes an inherent assumption that aligning the values of the robot with that of the human benefits the team. This assumption, however, has not been empirically verified. Moreover, prior literature does not account for human's trust in the robot when analyzing human-robot value alignment. Thus, a research gap needs to be bridged by answering two questions: How does alignment of values affect trust? Is it always beneficial to align the robot's values with that of the human? We present a simulation study and a human-subject study to answer these questions. Results from the simulation study show that alignment of values is important for trust when the overall risk level of the task is high. We also present an adaptive strategy for the robot that uses Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) to match the values of the robot with those of the human during interaction. Our simulations suggest that such an adaptive strategy is able to maintain trust across the full spectrum of human values. We also present results from an empirical study that validate these findings from simulation. Results indicate that real-time personalized value alignment is beneficial to trust and perceived performance by the human when the robot does not have a good prior on the human's values.

We present an expectation-maximization (EM) based unified framework for non-negative tensor decomposition that optimizes the Kullback-Leibler divergence. To avoid iterations in each M-step and learning rate tuning, we establish a general relationship between low-rank decomposition and many-body approximation. Using this connection, we exploit that the closed-form solution of the many-body approximation can be used to update all parameters simultaneously in the M-step. Our framework not only offers a unified methodology for a variety of low-rank structures, including CP, Tucker, and Train decompositions, but also their combinations forming mixtures of tensors as well as robust adaptive noise modeling. Empirically, we demonstrate that our framework provides superior generalization for discrete density estimation compared to conventional tensor-based approaches.