Baking Success with Variational Bayesian Inference
Learn how Variational Bayesian Inference transforms data analysis into a recipe for success.
Laura Battaglia, Geoff Nicholls
― 7 min read
Table of Contents
- What is Bayesian Inference?
- Variational Inference: Simplifying the Process
- The Role of Hyperparameters
- Challenges with Hyperparameter Selection
- Normalising Flows: The Expressive Kitchen Mixer
- Amortised Variational Inference: The Efficient Baker
- Application to Generalised Bayesian Inference
- Construction of the Variational Meta-Posterior Model
- Properties of the VMP
- Testing the Approach with Real Data
- Sensitivity Analysis and Hyperparameter Selection
- Conclusion
- Original Source
- Reference Links
Variational Bayesian Inference (VBI) might sound like a fancy term only scientists use during coffee breaks. But it's actually a method statisticians use to make sense of data with a focus on how certain parameters can affect the results. Picture a baker trying to determine the perfect amount of sugar to add to a cake recipe — too little, and the cake is bland; too much, and it turns into a sugar bomb. VBI helps identify that perfect mix.
Normalising Flows come into play as a special tool within this approach, similar to whisking the batter until it's just right. They help to transform simple and easy-to-work-with distributions into more complex ones needed for the analysis.
What is Bayesian Inference?
At its core, Bayesian Inference is a method of updating our beliefs about the world when new evidence comes in. Imagine you think it might rain today because your neighbor mentioned seeing dark clouds. Then, you step outside and feel a drizzle. Now, you’re more convinced it might rain, right? That’s Bayesian reasoning in action.
In statistical terms, we start with a prior belief (the chance of rain), incorporate new data (the drizzle), and come up with a posterior belief (it’s definitely raincoat time). This process can get complicated when we have many variables or parameters to consider—like how much the dark clouds, wind patterns, and the neighbor's reliability affect our conclusions.
Variational Inference: Simplifying the Process
While Bayesian Inference is powerful, it can become a maze of mathematical equations that even experienced mathematicians might find themselves lost in. Enter Variational Inference. Think of it as a shortcut through that maze.
In traditional Bayesian methods, we draw samples from a complicated distribution to get our answers. It’s like trying to find your way through a dark room using a flashlight—slow and reliant on how lucky you are with the beam of light. Variational Inference, however, gives you a map. Instead of sampling, it seeks to find the best possible approximation of the complex distribution by using a simpler one.
Hyperparameters
The Role ofWhenever we deal with models, we have certain settings or “knobs” we can tweak. These knobs are called hyperparameters. For instance, if we were making a pizza, the amount of cheese or the oven temperature would serve as hyperparameters. Adjusting these can significantly impact the final product.
In Bayesian terms, hyperparameters dictate how we structure our models. Choosing them is crucial, but it can be like trying to choose between a classic Margherita or a bold Hawaiian pizza. Everyone has a different preference.
Challenges with Hyperparameter Selection
Selecting hyperparameters comes with its own set of challenges. If you only have a few hyperparameters, it's manageable, like deciding on toppings for one pizza. But what happens when you have to choose for a whole buffet with dozens of variations? Running through all these combinations using traditional methods can be impractical and time-consuming.
Checking how sensitive our results are to our hyperparameter choices is essential. If changing one little knob sends our results flying off the charts, we might be in trouble. Imagine baking a cake where a small change in the oven temperature could either lead to a delicious treat or a burnt disaster.
Normalising Flows: The Expressive Kitchen Mixer
Now, let’s dig into normalising flows. Normalising flows are like a fancy kitchen mixer that can whip up your ingredients into a smooth batter. They are a type of machine learning model that helps transform simple distributions into complex ones, thus enabling better fitting to our data.
Using normalising flows allows us to create robust approximations of the distributions we want to work with. So, instead of manually tweaking each hyperparameter while hoping for the best outcome, we can use stylish models to automate parts of the process.
Amortised Variational Inference: The Efficient Baker
Amortised Variational Inference is a method that combines the best of both worlds: traditional variational inference and normalising flows. Instead of recalibrating every time we change a hyperparameter, this technique allows us to create a model that can handle changes more gracefully, like a baker who has perfected the art of baking and can whip up a cake without missing a beat.
With this approach, we need to fit our model only once. Then, we can efficiently sample posterior distributions across a range of hyperparameters without starting over each time. It’s like having a universal pizza recipe that adjusts based on available ingredients.
Application to Generalised Bayesian Inference
Generalised Bayesian Inference, often linked with machine learning contexts, takes any model and combines it with its hyperparameters, giving it a more versatile range. It’s like transforming a basic pizza into something gourmet with a wide variety of toppings.
In many workflows, it is necessary to check how posterior expectations depend on hyperparameter values. The challenge is that re-running models or fitting them to data at each hyperparameter setting can be extremely resource-intensive. By applying amortised variational inference, we can assess how various hyperparameter settings impact our outcomes without undertaking the computational burden of continuous refitting.
Moreover, when using simulation-based inference, you might often get stuck since there isn’t always a clear generative model available for the data. However, using normalising flows with amortised variational inference allows us to fit models efficiently across a wide range of hyperparameters.
Construction of the Variational Meta-Posterior Model
When constructing the Variational Meta-Posterior (VMP), we start with a family of special densities that can effectively capture our target posterior distribution. The goal is to identify a simple density that can represent the much more complex posterior we want to analyze.
The VMP utilizes normalising flows to devise a map. This map acts like a super blender, ensuring we can continuously and effectively adjust our approach based on the hyperparameters we plug into it. Each model setting leads to a slightly different cake but keeps the overall essence intact.
Properties of the VMP
The power of the VMP comes from its ability to remain a universal approximator. This means it can approximate a wide range of target distributions, given a sufficient configuration of parameters. It's like the ultimate kitchen appliance that can handle anything from cakes to bread to pastries.
However, achieving this requires us to use effective flow structures. A powerful enough flow can help us navigate the boundaries of different hyperparameter settings without sacrificing accuracy.
Testing the Approach with Real Data
To see how well the VMP works, numerous tests are conducted across various data types and sizes. For instance, when evaluated on simple synthetic data, the VMP is able to estimate hyperparameters well, closely matching the true values. It’s like a well-trained baker who knows exactly how much flour to use.
In more complex scenarios, like analyzing epidemiological data, the VMP shines through by providing informative estimates while managing hyperparameter interactions gracefully. The results from such analyses help illustrate how varying hyperparameters can significantly influence outcomes, just like switching the oven temperature can affect the baking time.
Sensitivity Analysis and Hyperparameter Selection
One of the key benefits of using the VMP is the ease with which it helps perform sensitivity analysis. Like a good chef tasting their food for seasoning, we can tweak our hyperparameters and see how those adjustments impact our final results.
When estimating hyperparameters, it’s vital to use loss functions tailored for the specific analysis goals. Depending on what we want to achieve—be it prediction or parameter estimation—we can select different loss functions to guide us.
Conclusion
In the world of Bayesian inference, hyperparameters are the secret ingredients that can make or break our models. Understanding how to adjust these ingredients without a messy kitchen or too much chaos is vital. Variational Bayesian Inference and normalising flows provide us with the necessary tools to explore the vast landscape of parameters while ensuring we serve up well-fitted models.
By applying techniques like amortised variational inference and the VMP, we can efficiently approximate complex distributions, providing insight into how various components of our models interact. It's like having a solid recipe that can be adjusted effortlessly. So, whether it’s cakes, pizzas, or complex statistical models, mastering the art of tuning ingredients is crucial for a successful outcome.
Original Source
Title: Amortising Variational Bayesian Inference over prior hyperparameters with a Normalising Flow
Abstract: In Bayesian inference prior hyperparameters are chosen subjectively or estimated using empirical Bayes methods. Generalised Bayesian Inference also has hyperparameters (the learning rate, and parameters of the loss). As part of the Generalised-Bayes workflow it is necessary to check sensitivity to the choice of hyperparameters, but running MCMC or fitting a variational approximation at each hyperparameter setting is impractical when there are more than a few hyperparameters. Simulation Based Inference has been used to amortise over data and hyperparameters and can be useful for Bayesian problems. However, there is no Simulation Based Inference for Generalised Bayes posteriors, as there is no generative model for the data. Working with a variational family parameterised by a normalising flow, we show how to fit a variational Generalised Bayes posterior, amortised over all hyperparameters. This may be sampled very efficiently at different hyperparameter values without refitting, and supports efficient robustness checks and hyperparameter selection. We show that there exist amortised normalising-flow architectures which are universal approximators. We test our approach on a relatively large-scale application of Generalised Bayesian Inference. The code is available online.
Authors: Laura Battaglia, Geoff Nicholls
Last Update: 2024-12-20 00:00:00
Language: English
Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16419
Source PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.16419
Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Changes: This summary was created with assistance from AI and may have inaccuracies. For accurate information, please refer to the original source documents linked here.
Thank you to arxiv for use of its open access interoperability.
Reference Links
- https://github.com/llaurabatt/amortised-variational-flows.git
- https://proceedings.mlr.press/v89/ambrogioni19a.html
- https://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/rssb.12158
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.09819
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05763
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.06804
- https://github.com/chriscarmona/modularbayes
- https://doi.org/10.1214/23-BA1409
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.08803
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.04032
- https://openreview.net/forum?id=Kxtpa9rvM0
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.10911
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.09968
- https://openreview.net/forum?id=ZARAiV25CW
- https://escholarship.org/uc/item/34j1h7k5
- https://jmlr.org/papers/v19/17-670.html
- https://projecteuclid.org/journals/bayesian-analysis/advance-publication/Evaluating-Sensitivity-to-the-Stick-Breaking-Prior-in-Bayesian-Nonparametrics/10.1214/22-BA1309.full
- https://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/golinski19a.html
- https://projecteuclid.org/journals/bayesian-analysis/volume-12/issue-4/Inconsistency-of-Bayesian-Inference-for-Misspecified-Linear-Models-and-a/10.1214/17-BA1085.full
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.08719
- https://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/huang18d.html
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13701
- https://openreview.net/forum?id=PqvMRDCJT9t
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08806
- https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177010269
- https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11222-014-9503-z
- https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4
- https://doi.org/10.1080/00949650412331299120
- https://openreview.net/forum?id=D2cS6SoYlP
- https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/6111
- https://doi.org/10.1214/21-BA1302
- https://doi.org/10.1214/23-STS886
- https://www.wandb.com/
- https://github.com/jax-ml/jax
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.09782
- https://github.com/deepmind
- https://doi.org/10.1111/rssb.12336
- https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ba/1340370392
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.03274
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.01584
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.09706
- https://papers.nips.cc/paper/2012/hash/05311655a15b75fab86956663e1819cd-Abstract.html
- https://openreview.net/forum?id=sKqGVqkvuS
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.07468