Towards Machine Wald

The past century has seen a steady increase in the need of estimating and predicting complex systems and making (possibly critical) decisions with limited information. Although computers have made possible the numerical evaluation of sophisticated statistical models, these models are still designed \emph{by humans} because there is currently no known recipe or algorithm for dividing the design of a statistical model into a sequence of arithmetic operations. Indeed enabling computers to \emph{think} as \emph{humans} have the ability to do when faced with uncertainty is challenging in several major ways: (1) Finding optimal statistical models remains to be formulated as a well posed problem when information on the system of interest is incomplete and comes in the form of a complex combination of sample data, partial knowledge of constitutive relations and a limited description of the distribution of input random variables. (2) The space of admissible scenarios along with the space of relevant information, assumptions, and/or beliefs, tend to be infinite dimensional, whereas calculus on a computer is necessarily discrete and finite. With this purpose, this paper explores the foundations of a rigorous framework for the scientific computation of optimal statistical estimators/models and reviews their connections with Decision Theory, Machine Learning, Bayesian Inference, Stochastic Optimization, Robust Optimization, Optimal Uncertainty Quantification and Information Based Complexity.Comment: 37 page

Likelihood Inference for Models with Unobservables: Another View

There have been controversies among statisticians on (i) what to model and (ii) how to make inferences from models with unobservables. One such controversy concerns the difference between estimation methods for the marginal means not necessarily having a probabilistic basis and statistical models having unobservables with a probabilistic basis. Another concerns likelihood-based inference for statistical models with unobservables. This needs an extended-likelihood framework, and we show how one such extension, hierarchical likelihood, allows this to be done. Modeling of unobservables leads to rich classes of new probabilistic models from which likelihood-type inferences can be made naturally with hierarchical likelihood.Comment: This paper discussed in: [arXiv:1010.0804], [arXiv:1010.0807], [arXiv:1010.0810]. Rejoinder at [arXiv:1010.0814]. Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-STS277 the Statistical Science (http://www.imstat.org/sts/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Generalized Stochastic Gradient Learning

We study the properties of generalized stochastic gradient (GSG) learning in forwardlooking models. We examine how the conditions for stability of standard stochastic gradient (SG) learning both di1er from and are related to E-stability, which governs stability under least squares learning. SG algorithms are sensitive to units of measurement and we show that there is a transformation of variables for which E-stability governs SG stability. GSG algorithms with constant gain have a deeper justification in terms of parameter drift, robustness and risk sensitivity

On the Brittleness of Bayesian Inference

With the advent of high-performance computing, Bayesian methods are increasingly popular tools for the quantification of uncertainty throughout science and industry. Since these methods impact the making of sometimes critical decisions in increasingly complicated contexts, the sensitivity of their posterior conclusions with respect to the underlying models and prior beliefs is a pressing question for which there currently exist positive and negative results. We report new results suggesting that, although Bayesian methods are robust when the number of possible outcomes is finite or when only a finite number of marginals of the data-generating distribution are unknown, they could be generically brittle when applied to continuous systems (and their discretizations) with finite information on the data-generating distribution. If closeness is defined in terms of the total variation metric or the matching of a finite system of generalized moments, then (1) two practitioners who use arbitrarily close models and observe the same (possibly arbitrarily large amount of) data may reach opposite conclusions; and (2) any given prior and model can be slightly perturbed to achieve any desired posterior conclusions. The mechanism causing brittlenss/robustness suggests that learning and robustness are antagonistic requirements and raises the question of a missing stability condition for using Bayesian Inference in a continuous world under finite information.Comment: 20 pages, 2 figures. To appear in SIAM Review (Research Spotlights). arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1304.677

A review of R-packages for random-intercept probit regression in small clusters

Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) are widely used to model clustered categorical outcomes. To tackle the intractable integration over the random effects distributions, several approximation approaches have been developed for likelihood-based inference. As these seldom yield satisfactory results when analyzing binary outcomes from small clusters, estimation within the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) framework is proposed as an alternative. We compare the performance of R-packages for random-intercept probit regression relying on: the Laplace approximation, adaptive Gaussian quadrature (AGQ), Penalized Quasi-Likelihood (PQL), an MCMC-implementation, and integrated nested Laplace approximation within the GLMM-framework, and a robust diagonally weighted least squares estimation within the SEM-framework. In terms of bias for the fixed and random effect estimators, SEM usually performs best for cluster size two, while AGQ prevails in terms of precision (mainly because of SEM's robust standard errors). As the cluster size increases, however, AGQ becomes the best choice for both bias and precision

Generalized Stochastic Gradient Learning

We study the properties of generalized stochastic gradient (GSG) learning in forward-looking models. We examine how the conditions for stability of standard stochastic gradient (SG) learning both differ from and are related to E-stability, which governs stability under least squares learning. SG algorithms are sensitive to units of measurement and we show that there is a transformation of variables for which E-stability governs SG stability. GSG algorithms with constant gain have a deeper justification in terms of parameter drift, robustness and risk sensitivity.