Bayesian Inference on Matrix Manifolds for Linear Dimensionality Reduction

We reframe linear dimensionality reduction as a problem of Bayesian inference on matrix manifolds. This natural paradigm extends the Bayesian framework to dimensionality reduction tasks in higher dimensions with simpler models at greater speeds. Here an orthogonal basis is treated as a single point on a manifold and is associated with a linear subspace on which observations vary maximally. Throughout this paper, we employ the Grassmann and Stiefel manifolds for various dimensionality reduction problems, explore the connection between the two manifolds, and use Hybrid Monte Carlo for posterior sampling on the Grassmannian for the first time. We delineate in which situations either manifold should be considered. Further, matrix manifold models are used to yield scientific insight in the context of cognitive neuroscience, and we conclude that our methods are suitable for basic inference as well as accurate prediction.Comment: All datasets and computer programs are publicly available at http://www.ics.uci.edu/~babaks/Site/Codes.htm

Bayesian Exponential Random Graph Models with Nodal Random Effects

We extend the well-known and widely used Exponential Random Graph Model (ERGM) by including nodal random effects to compensate for heterogeneity in the nodes of a network. The Bayesian framework for ERGMs proposed by Caimo and Friel (2011) yields the basis of our modelling algorithm. A central question in network models is the question of model selection and following the Bayesian paradigm we focus on estimating Bayes factors. To do so we develop an approximate but feasible calculation of the Bayes factor which allows one to pursue model selection. Two data examples and a small simulation study illustrate our mixed model approach and the corresponding model selection.Comment: 23 pages, 9 figures, 3 table

Bayesian model selection for exponential random graph models via adjusted pseudolikelihoods

Models with intractable likelihood functions arise in areas including network analysis and spatial statistics, especially those involving Gibbs random fields. Posterior parameter es timation in these settings is termed a doubly-intractable problem because both the likelihood function and the posterior distribution are intractable. The comparison of Bayesian models is often based on the statistical evidence, the integral of the un-normalised posterior distribution over the model parameters which is rarely available in closed form. For doubly-intractable models, estimating the evidence adds another layer of difficulty. Consequently, the selection of the model that best describes an observed network among a collection of exponential random graph models for network analysis is a daunting task. Pseudolikelihoods offer a tractable approximation to the likelihood but should be treated with caution because they can lead to an unreasonable inference. This paper specifies a method to adjust pseudolikelihoods in order to obtain a reasonable, yet tractable, approximation to the likelihood. This allows implementation of widely used computational methods for evidence estimation and pursuit of Bayesian model selection of exponential random graph models for the analysis of social networks. Empirical comparisons to existing methods show that our procedure yields similar evidence estimates, but at a lower computational cost.Comment: Supplementary material attached. To view attachments, please download and extract the gzzipped source file listed under "Other formats

Fixed-Form Variational Posterior Approximation through Stochastic Linear Regression

We propose a general algorithm for approximating nonstandard Bayesian posterior distributions. The algorithm minimizes the Kullback-Leibler divergence of an approximating distribution to the intractable posterior distribution. Our method can be used to approximate any posterior distribution, provided that it is given in closed form up to the proportionality constant. The approximation can be any distribution in the exponential family or any mixture of such distributions, which means that it can be made arbitrarily precise. Several examples illustrate the speed and accuracy of our approximation method in practice

Patterns of Scalable Bayesian Inference

Datasets are growing not just in size but in complexity, creating a demand for rich models and quantification of uncertainty. Bayesian methods are an excellent fit for this demand, but scaling Bayesian inference is a challenge. In response to this challenge, there has been considerable recent work based on varying assumptions about model structure, underlying computational resources, and the importance of asymptotic correctness. As a result, there is a zoo of ideas with few clear overarching principles. In this paper, we seek to identify unifying principles, patterns, and intuitions for scaling Bayesian inference. We review existing work on utilizing modern computing resources with both MCMC and variational approximation techniques. From this taxonomy of ideas, we characterize the general principles that have proven successful for designing scalable inference procedures and comment on the path forward

Algebraic Bayesian analysis of contingency tables with possibly zero-probability cells

In this paper we consider a Bayesian analysis of contingency tables allowing for the possibility that cells may have probability zero. In this sense we depart from standard log-linear modeling that implicitly assumes a positivity constraint. Our approach leads us to consider mixture models for contingency tables, where the components of the mixture, which we call model-instances, have distinct support. We rely on ideas from polynomial algebra in order to identify the various model instances. We also provide a method to assign prior probabilities to each instance of the model, as well as describing methods for constructing priors on the parameter space of each instance. We illustrate our methodology through a $5 \times 2$ table involving two structural zeros, as well as a zero count. The results we obtain show that our analysis may lead to conclusions that are substantively different from those that would obtain in a standard framework, wherein the possibility of zero-probability cells is not explicitly accounted for