arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2111.12720

Machine learning assisted Bayesian model comparison: learnt harmonic mean estimator

Abstract

We resurrect the infamous harmonic mean estimator for computing the marginal likelihood (Bayesian evidence) and solve its problematic large variance. The marginal likelihood is a key component of Bayesian model selection to evaluate model posterior probabilities; however, its computation is challenging. The original harmonic mean estimator, first proposed by Newton and Raftery in 1994, involves computing the harmonic mean of the likelihood given samples from the posterior. It was immediately realised that the original estimator can fail catastrophically since its variance can become very large (possibly not finite). A number of variants of the harmonic mean estimator have been proposed to address this issue although none have proven fully satisfactory. We present the \emph{learnt harmonic mean estimator}, a variant of the original estimator that solves its large variance problem. This is achieved by interpreting the harmonic mean estimator as importance sampling and introducing a new target distribution. The new target distribution is learned to approximate the optimal but inaccessible target, while minimising the variance of the resulting estimator. Since the estimator requires samples of the posterior only, it is agnostic to the sampling strategy used. We validate the estimator on a variety of numerical experiments, including a number of pathological examples where the original harmonic mean estimator fails catastrophically. We also consider a cosmological application, where our approach leads to $\sim$ 3 to 6 times more samples than current state-of-the-art techniques in 1/3 of the time. In all cases our learnt harmonic mean estimator is shown to be highly accurate. The estimator is computationally scalable and can be applied to problems of dimension $O(10^3)$ and beyond. Code implementing the learnt harmonic mean estimator is made publicly available

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jason D. McEwen, Christopher G. R. Wallis, Matthew A. Price, Alessio Spurio Mancini. 2021-11-24. Machine learning assisted Bayesian model comparison: learnt harmonic mean estimator. https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12720

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