Linear models remain ubiquitous in modern spatial applications - including climate science, public health, and economics - due to their interpretability, speed, and reproducibility. While practitioners generally report a form of uncertainty, popular spatial uncertainty quantification methods do not jointly handle model misspecification and distribution shift - despite both being essentially always present in spatial problems. In the present paper, we show that existing methods for constructing confidence (or credible) intervals in spatial linear models fail to provide correct coverage due to unaccounted-for bias. In contrast to classical methods that rely on an i.i.d. assumption that is inappropriate in spatial problems, in the present work we instead make a spatial smoothness (Lipschitz) assumption. We are then able to propose a new confidence-interval construction that accounts for bias in the estimation procedure. We demonstrate that our new method achieves nominal coverage via both theory and experiments. Code to reproduce experiments is available at https://github.com/DavidRBurt/Lipschitz-Driven-Inference.

Spatial prediction tasks are key to weather forecasting, studying air pollution, and other scientific endeavors. Determining how much to trust predictions made by statistical or physical methods is essential for the credibility of scientific conclusions. Unfortunately, classical approaches for validation fail to handle mismatch between locations available for validation and (test) locations where we want to make predictions. This mismatch is often not an instance of covariate shift (as commonly formalized) because the validation and test locations are fixed (e.g., on a grid or at select points) rather than i.i.d. from two distributions. In the present work, we formalize a check on validation methods: that they become arbitrarily accurate as validation data becomes arbitrarily dense. We show that classical and covariate-shift methods can fail this check. We instead propose a method that builds from existing ideas in the covariate-shift literature, but adapts them to the validation data at hand. We prove that our proposal passes our check. And we demonstrate its advantages empirically on simulated and real data.

Gaussian processes are frequently deployed as part of larger machine learning and decision-making systems, for instance in geospatial modeling, Bayesian optimization, or in latent Gaussian models. Within a system, the Gaussian process model needs to perform in a stable and reliable manner to ensure it interacts correctly with other parts of the system. In this work, we study the numerical stability of scalable sparse approximations based on inducing points. To do so, we first review numerical stability, and illustrate typical situations in which Gaussian process models can be unstable. Building on stability theory originally developed in the interpolation literature, we derive sufficient and in certain cases necessary conditions on the inducing points for the computations performed to be numerically stable. For low-dimensional tasks such as geospatial modeling, we propose an automated method for computing inducing points satisfying these conditions. This is done via a modification of the cover tree data structure, which is of independent interest. We additionally propose an alternative sparse approximation for regression with a Gaussian likelihood which trades off a small amount of performance to further improve stability. We provide illustrative examples showing the relationship between stability of calculations and predictive performance of inducing point methods on spatial tasks.

Given sparse observations of buoy velocities, oceanographers are interested in reconstructing ocean currents away from the buoys and identifying divergences in a current vector field. As a first and modular step, we focus on the time-stationary case - for instance, by restricting to short time periods. Since we expect current velocity to be a continuous but highly non-linear function of spatial location, Gaussian processes (GPs) offer an attractive model. But we show that applying a GP with a standard stationary kernel directly to buoy data can struggle at both current reconstruction and divergence identification, due to some physically unrealistic prior assumptions. To better reflect known physical properties of currents, we propose to instead put a standard stationary kernel on the divergence and curl-free components of a vector field obtained through a Helmholtz decomposition. We show that, because this decomposition relates to the original vector field just via mixed partial derivatives, we can still perform inference given the original data with only a small constant multiple of additional computational expense. We illustrate the benefits of our method with theory and experiments on synthetic and real ocean data.

Recent work in scalable approximate Gaussian process regression has discussed a bias-variance-computation trade-off when estimating the log marginal likelihood. We suggest a method that adaptively selects the amount of computation to use when estimating the log marginal likelihood so that the bias of the objective function is guaranteed to be small. While simple in principle, our current implementation of the method is not competitive computationally with existing approximations.

In this paper, we investigate the question: Given a small number of datapoints, for example N = 30, how tight can PAC-Bayes and test set bounds be made? For such small datasets, test set bounds adversely affect generalisation performance by discarding data. In this setting, PAC-Bayes bounds are especially attractive, due to their ability to use all the data to simultaneously learn a posterior and bound its generalisation risk. We focus on the case of i.i.d. data with a bounded loss and consider the generic PAC-Bayes theorem of Germain et al. (2009) and Begin et al. (2016). While their theorem is known to recover many existing PAC-Bayes bounds, it is unclear what the tightest bound derivable from their framework is. Surprisingly, we show that for a fixed learning algorithm and dataset, the tightest bound of this form coincides with the tightest bound of the more restrictive family of bounds considered in Catoni (2007). In contrast, in the more natural case of distributions over datasets, we give examples (both analytic and numerical) showing that the family of bounds in Catoni (2007) can be suboptimal. Within the proof framework of Germain et al. (2009) and Begin et al. (2016), we establish a lower bound on the best bound achievable in expectation, which recovers the Chernoff test set bound in the case when the posterior is equal to the prior. Finally, to illustrate how tight these bounds can potentially be, we study a synthetic one-dimensional classification task in which it is feasible to meta-learn both the prior and the form of the bound to obtain the tightest PAC-Bayes and test set bounds possible. We find that in this simple, controlled scenario, PAC-Bayes bounds are surprisingly competitive with comparable, commonly used Chernoff test set bounds. However, the sharpest test set bounds still lead to better guarantees on the generalisation error than the PAC-Bayes bounds we consider.

We propose a lower bound on the log marginal likelihood of Gaussian process regression models that can be computed without matrix factorisation of the full kernel matrix. We show that approximate maximum likelihood learning of model parameters by maximising our lower bound retains many of the sparse variational approach benefits while reducing the bias introduced into parameter learning. The basis of our bound is a more careful analysis of the log-determinant term appearing in the log marginal likelihood, as well as using the method of conjugate gradients to derive tight lower bounds on the term involving a quadratic form. Our approach is a step forward in unifying methods relying on lower bound maximisation (e.g. variational methods) and iterative approaches based on conjugate gradients for training Gaussian processes. In experiments, we show improved predictive performance with our model for a comparable amount of training time compared to other conjugate gradient based approaches.

Recent work has attempted to directly approximate the `function-space' or predictive posterior distribution of Bayesian models, without approximating the posterior distribution over the parameters. This is appealing in e.g. Bayesian neural networks, where we only need the former, and the latter is hard to represent. In this work, we highlight some advantages and limitations of employing the Kullback-Leibler divergence in this setting. For example, we show that minimizing the KL divergence between a wide class of parametric distributions and the posterior induced by a (non-degenerate) Gaussian process prior leads to an ill-defined objective function. Then, we propose (featurized) Bayesian linear regression as a benchmark for `function-space' inference methods that directly measures approximation quality. We apply this methodology to assess aspects of the objective function and inference scheme considered in Sun, Zhang, Shi, and Grosse (2018), emphasizing the quality of approximation to Bayesian inference as opposed to predictive performance.

Gaussian processes are distributions over functions that are versatile and mathematically convenient priors in Bayesian modelling. However, their use is often impeded for data with large numbers of observations, $N$, due to the cubic (in $N$) cost of matrix operations used in exact inference. Many solutions have been proposed that rely on $M \ll N$ inducing variables to form an approximation at a cost of $\mathcal{O}(NM^2)$. While the computational cost appears linear in $N$, the true complexity depends on how $M$ must scale with $N$ to ensure a certain quality of the approximation. In this work, we investigate upper and lower bounds on how $M$ needs to grow with $N$ to ensure high quality approximations. We show that we can make the KL-divergence between the approximate model and the exact posterior arbitrarily small for a Gaussian-noise regression model with $M\ll N$. Specifically, for the popular squared exponential kernel and $D$-dimensional Gaussian distributed covariates, $M=\mathcal{O}((\log N)^D)$ suffice and a method with an overall computational cost of $\mathcal{O}(N(\log N)^{2D}(\log\log N)^2)$ can be used to perform inference.

Sparse stochastic variational inference allows Gaussian process models to be applied to large datasets. The per iteration computational cost of inference with this method is $\mathcal{O}(\tilde{N}M^2+M^3),$ where $\tilde{N}$ is the number of points in a minibatch and $M$ is the number of `inducing features', which determine the expressiveness of the variational family. Several recent works have shown that for certain priors, features can be defined that remove the $\mathcal{O}(M^3)$ cost of computing a minibatch estimate of an evidence lower bound (ELBO). This represents a significant computational savings when $M\gg \tilde{N}$. We present a construction of features for any stationary prior kernel that allow for computation of an unbiased estimator to the ELBO using $T$ Monte Carlo samples in $\mathcal{O}(\tilde{N}T+M^2T)$ and in $\mathcal{O}(\tilde{N}T+MT)$ with an additional approximation. We analyze the impact of this additional approximation on inference quality.