Table evaluated hyperparameters Dataset Nd GPR |M| - - q() - - free-form Boston 506 13 3.049 Concrete 1030 8 4.864 Ener 768 8 0.441 WineRed1599 11 0.640 Yacht308 6 0.353

Further,the presence of multiple modes can affect the interpretability of kernel hyperparameters.

The kernel function and its hyperparameters are the central model selection choice in a Gaussian process (Rasmussen and Williams, 2006).Typically, the hyperparameters of the kernel are chosen by maximising the marginal likelihood, an approach known as Type-II maximum likelihood (ML-II). However, ML-II does not account for hyperparameter uncertainty, and it is well-known that this can lead to severely biased estimates and an underestimation of predictive uncertainty. While there are several works which employ fully Bayesian characterisation of GPs, relatively few propose such approaches for the sparse GPs paradigm. In this work we propose an algorithm for sparse Gaussian process regression which leverages MCMC to sample from the hyperparameter posterior within the variational inducing point framework of (Titsias, 2009). This work is closely related to (Hensman et al, 2015b) but side-steps the need to sample the inducing points, thereby significantly improving sampling efficiency in the Gaussian likelihood case. We compare this scheme against natural baselines in literature along with stochastic variational GPs (SVGPs) along with an extensive computational analysis.

Gaussian Process models are a rich distribution over functions with inductive biases controlled by a kernel function. Learning occurs through optimisation of the kernel hyperparameters using the marginal likelihood as the objective.

The kernel function and its hyperparameters are the central model selection choice in a Gaussian process (Rasmussen and Williams, 2006).Typically, the hyperparameters of the kernel are chosen by maximising the marginal likelihood, an approach known as Type-II maximum likelihood (ML-II). However, ML-II does not account for hyperparameter uncertainty, and it is well-known that this can lead to severely biased estimates and an underestimation of predictive uncertainty. While there are several works which employ fully Bayesian characterisation of GPs, relatively few propose such approaches for the sparse GPs paradigm. In this work we propose an algorithm for sparse Gaussian process regression which leverages MCMC to sample from the hyperparameter posterior within the variational inducing point framework of (Titsias, 2009). This work is closely related to (Hensman et al, 2015b) but side-steps the need to sample the inducing points, thereby significantly improving sampling efficiency in the Gaussian likelihood case. We compare this scheme against natural baselines in literature along with stochastic variational GPs (SVGPs) along with an extensive computational analysis.

The kernel function and its hyperparameters are the central model selection choice in a Gaussian process [Rasmussen and Williams, 2006]. Typically, the hyperparameters of the kernel are chosen by maximising the marginal likelihood, an approach known as Type-II maximum likelihood (ML-II). However, ML-II does not account for hyperparameter uncertainty, and it is well-known that this can lead to severely biased estimates and an underestimation of predictive uncertainty. While there are several works which employ a fully Bayesian characterisation of GPs, relatively few propose such approaches for the sparse GPs paradigm. In this work we propose an algorithm for sparse Gaussian process regression which leverages MCMC to sample from the hyperparameter posterior within the variational inducing point framework of [Titsias, 2009]. This work is closely related to Hensman et al. [2015b], but side-steps the need to sample the inducing points, thereby significantly improving sampling efficiency in the Gaussian likelihood case. We compare this scheme against natural baselines in literature along with stochastic variational GPs (SVGPs) along with an extensive computational analysis.

Gaussian Process (GPs) models are a rich distribution over functions with inductive biases controlled by a kernel function. Learning occurs through the optimisation of kernel hyperparameters using the marginal likelihood as the objective. This classical approach known as Type-II maximum likelihood (ML-II) yields point estimates of the hyperparameters, and continues to be the default method for training GPs. However, this approach risks underestimating predictive uncertainty and is prone to overfitting especially when there are many hyperparameters. Furthermore, gradient based optimisation makes ML-II point estimates highly susceptible to the presence of local minima. This work presents an alternative learning procedure where the hyperparameters of the kernel function are marginalised using Nested Sampling (NS), a technique that is well suited to sample from complex, multi-modal distributions. We focus on regression tasks with the spectral mixture (SM) class of kernels and find that a principled approach to quantifying model uncertainty leads to substantial gains in predictive performance across a range of synthetic and benchmark data sets. In this context, nested sampling is also found to offer a speed advantage over Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC), widely considered to be the gold-standard in MCMC based inference.

Learning in Gaussian Process models occurs through the adaptation of hyperparameters of the mean and the covariance function. The classical approach entails maximizing the marginal likelihood yielding fixed point estimates (an approach called \textit{Type II maximum likelihood} or ML-II). An alternative learning procedure is to infer the posterior over hyperparameters in a hierarchical specification of GPs we call \textit{Fully Bayesian Gaussian Process Regression} (GPR). This work considers two approximation schemes for the intractable hyperparameter posterior: 1) Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) yielding a sampling-based approximation and 2) Variational Inference (VI) where the posterior over hyperparameters is approximated by a factorized Gaussian (mean-field) or a full-rank Gaussian accounting for correlations between hyperparameters. We analyze the predictive performance for fully Bayesian GPR on a range of benchmark data sets.