arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1707.04246

Iterative Updating of Model Error for Bayesian Inversion

Abstract

In computational inverse problems, it is common that a detailed and accurate forward model is approximated by a computationally less challenging substitute. The model reduction may be necessary to meet constraints in computing time when optimization algorithms are used to find a single estimate, or to speed up Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) calculations in the Bayesian framework. The use of an approximate model introduces a discrepancy, or modeling error, that may have a detrimental effect on the solution of the ill-posed inverse problem, or it may severely distort the estimate of the posterior distribution. In the Bayesian paradigm, the modeling error can be considered as a random variable, and by using an estimate of the probability distribution of the unknown, one may estimate the probability distribution of the modeling error and incorporate it into the inversion. We introduce an algorithm which iterates this idea to update the distribution of the model error, leading to a sequence of posterior distributions that are demonstrated empirically to capture the underlying truth with increasing accuracy. Since the algorithm is not based on rejections, it requires only limited full model evaluations. We show analytically that, in the linear Gaussian case, the algorithm converges geometrically fast with respect to the number of iterations. For more general models, we introduce particle approximations of the iteratively generated sequence of distributions; we also prove that each element of the sequence converges in the large particle limit. We show numerically that, as in the linear case, rapid convergence occurs with respect to the number of iterations. Additionally, we show through computed examples that point estimates obtained from this iterative algorithm are superior to those obtained by neglecting the model error.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Daniela Calvetti, Matthew M. Dunlop, Erkki Somersalo, Andrew M. Stuart. 2017-07-13. Iterative Updating of Model Error for Bayesian Inversion. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6420/aaa34d

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME