viterbi process
Regenerativity of Viterbi process for pairwise Markov models
For hidden Markov models one of the most popular estimates of the hidden chain is the Viterbi path -- the path maximising the posterior probability. We consider a more general setting, called the pairwise Markov model (PMM), where the joint process consisting of finite-state hidden process and observation process is assumed to be a Markov chain. It has been recently proven that under some conditions the Viterbi path of the PMM can almost surely be extended to infinity, thereby defining the infinite Viterbi decoding of the observation sequence, called the Viterbi process. This was done by constructing a block of observations, called a barrier, which ensures that the Viterbi path goes trough a given state whenever this block occurs in the observation sequence. In this paper we prove that the joint process consisting of Viterbi process and PMM is regenerative. The proof involves a delicate construction of regeneration times which coincide with the occurrences of barriers. As one possible application of our theory, some results on the asymptotics of the Viterbi training algorithm are derived.
The Viterbi process, decay-convexity and parallelized maximum a-posteriori estimation
The Viterbi process is the limiting maximum a-posteriori estimate of the unobserved path in a hidden Markov model as the length of the time horizon grows. The existence of such a process suggests that approximate estimation using optimization algorithms which process data segments in parallel may be accurate. For models on state-space $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ satisfying a new "decay-convexity" condition, we approach the existence of the Viterbi process through fixed points of ordinary differential equations in a certain infinite dimensional Hilbert space. Quantitative bounds on the distance to the Viterbi process show that approximate estimation via parallelization can indeed be accurate and scaleable to high-dimensional problems because the rate of convergence to the Viterbi process does not necessarily depend on $d$.