bayesian network
Learning Identifiable Gaussian Bayesian Networks in Polynomial Time and Sample Complexity
Learning the directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure of a Bayesian network from observational data is a notoriously difficult problem for which many non-identifiability and hardness results are known. In this paper we propose a provably polynomial-time algorithm for learning sparse Gaussian Bayesian networks with equal noise variance --- a class of Bayesian networks for which the DAG structure can be uniquely identified from observational data --- under high-dimensional settings. We show that $O(k^4 \log p)$ number of samples suffices for our method to recover the true DAG structure with high probability, where $p$ is the number of variables and $k$ is the maximum Markov blanket size. We obtain our theoretical guarantees under a condition called \emph{restricted strong adjacency faithfulness} (RSAF), which is strictly weaker than strong faithfulness --- a condition that other methods based on conditional independence testing need for their success. The sample complexity of our method matches the information-theoretic limits in terms of the dependence on $p$.
Learning and Testing Causal Models with Interventions
We consider testing and learning problems on causal Bayesian networks as defined by Pearl (Pearl, 2009). Given a causal Bayesian network M on a graph with n discrete variables and bounded in-degree and bounded ``confounded components'', we show that O(log n) interventions on an unknown causal Bayesian network X on the same graph, and O(n/epsilon^2) samples per intervention, suffice to efficiently distinguish whether X=M or whether there exists some intervention under which X and M are farther than epsilon in total variation distance. We also obtain sample/time/intervention efficient algorithms for: (i) testing the identity of two unknown causal Bayesian networks on the same graph; and (ii) learning a causal Bayesian network on a given graph. Although our algorithms are non-adaptive, we show that adaptivity does not help in general: Omega(log n) interventions are necessary for testing the identity of two unknown causal Bayesian networks on the same graph, even adaptively. Our algorithms are enabled by a new subadditivity inequality for the squared Hellinger distance between two causal Bayesian networks.
Learning Concave Conditional Likelihood Models for Improved Analysis of Tandem Mass Spectra
The most widely used technology to identify the proteins present in a complex biological sample is tandem mass spectrometry, which quickly produces a large collection of spectra representative of the peptides (i.e., protein subsequences) present in the original sample. In this work, we greatly expand the parameter learning capabilities of a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) peptide-scoring algorithm, Didea, by deriving emission distributions for which its conditional log-likelihood scoring function remains concave. We show that this class of emission distributions, called Convex Virtual Emissions (CVEs), naturally generalizes the log-sum-exp function while rendering both maximum likelihood estimation and conditional maximum likelihood estimation concave for a wide range of Bayesian networks. Utilizing CVEs in Didea allows efficient learning of a large number of parameters while ensuring global convergence, in stark contrast to Didea's previous parameter learning framework (which could only learn a single parameter using a costly grid search) and other trainable models (which only ensure convergence to local optima). The newly trained scoring function substantially outperforms the state-of-the-art in both scoring function accuracy and downstream Fisher kernel analysis. Furthermore, we significantly improve Didea's runtime performance through successive optimizations to its message passing schedule and derive explicit connections between Didea's new concave score and related MS/MS scoring functions.
Entropy testing and its application to testing Bayesian networks
This paper studies the problem of entropy identity testing: given sample access to a distribution p and a fully described distribution q (both discrete distributions over a domain of size k), and the promise that either p = q or |H (p) H (q)| ε, where H () denotes the Shannon entropy, a tester needs to distinguish between the two cases with high probability.
- North America > Bermuda (0.05)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (0.94)
- North America > Canada > Ontario > Toronto (0.14)
- North America > United States > California (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > France > Grand Est > Bas-Rhin > Strasbourg (0.04)
- Health & Medicine (0.46)
- Government (0.46)
- Asia > Afghanistan > Parwan Province > Charikar (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (0.70)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning > Regression (0.67)
- Europe > Switzerland > Basel-City > Basel (0.05)
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Greater London > London (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Modeling & Simulation (0.95)
- Information Technology > Data Science (0.93)
- South America > Brazil > São Paulo (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Greater London > London (0.04)
- Europe > Ireland (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Search (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (0.68)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (0.48)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (0.48)
- South America > Brazil (0.04)
- North America > Mexico (0.04)
- South America > Colombia (0.04)
- (6 more...)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Search (0.70)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (0.69)