Particle-Gibbs Sampling For Bayesian Feature Allocation Models

Bayesian feature allocation models are a popular tool for modelling data with a combinatorial latent structure. Exact inference in these models is generally intractable and so practitioners typically apply Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods for posterior inference. The most widely used MCMC strategies rely on an element wise Gibbs update of the feature allocation matrix. These element wise updates can be inefficient as features are typically strongly correlated. To overcome this problem we have developed a Gibbs sampler that can update an entire row of the feature allocation matrix in a single move. However, this sampler is impractical for models with a large number of features as the computational complexity scales exponentially in the number of features. We develop a Particle Gibbs sampler that targets the same distribution as the row wise Gibbs updates, but has computational complexity that only grows linearly in the number of features. We compare the performance of our proposed methods to the standard Gibbs sampler using synthetic data from a range of feature allocation models. Our results suggest that row wise updates using the PG methodology can significantly improve the performance of samplers for feature allocation models.

[1]  Tim Hesterberg,et al.  Monte Carlo Strategies in Scientific Computing , 2002, Technometrics.

[2]  A. Doucet,et al.  Efficient Bayesian Inference for Switching State-Space Models using Discrete Particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods , 2010, 1011.2437.

[3]  Eric Moulines,et al.  On Approximate Maximum-Likelihood Methods for Blind Identification: How to Cope With the Curse of Dimensionality , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[4]  P. Fearnhead,et al.  On‐line inference for hidden Markov models via particle filters , 2003 .

[5]  Fredrik Lindsten,et al.  Particle gibbs with ancestor sampling , 2014, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[6]  A. Doucet,et al.  A Tutorial on Particle Filtering and Smoothing: Fifteen years later , 2008 .

[7]  Julio Gonzalo,et al.  A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints , 2009, Information Retrieval.

[8]  Sumeetpal S. Singh,et al.  On particle Gibbs sampling , 2013, 1304.1887.

[9]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Cluster and Feature Modeling from Combinatorial Stochastic Processes , 2012, 1206.5862.

[10]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Nonparametric Latent Feature Models for Link Prediction , 2009, NIPS.

[11]  Janez Demsar,et al.  Statistical Comparisons of Classifiers over Multiple Data Sets , 2006, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[12]  A. Doucet,et al.  Particle Markov chain Monte Carlo methods , 2010 .

[13]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Infinite latent feature models and the Indian buffet process , 2005, NIPS.

[14]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Accelerated sampling for the Indian Buffet Process , 2009, ICML '09.

[15]  Philipp Koehn,et al.  Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL) , 2007 .

[16]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Particle Filtering for Nonparametric Bayesian Matrix Factorization , 2006, NIPS.

[17]  Arnaud Doucet,et al.  Particle Gibbs Split-Merge Sampling for Bayesian Inference in Mixture Models , 2015, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[18]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  JOINT MODELING OF MULTIPLE TIME SERIES VIA THE BETA PROCESS WITH APPLICATION TO MOTION CAPTURE SEGMENTATION , 2013, 1308.4747.

[19]  A. Bouchard-Côté,et al.  PyClone: statistical inference of clonal population structure in cancer , 2014, Nature Methods.

[20]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Modeling Dyadic Data with Binary Latent Factors , 2006, NIPS.

[21]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  The Indian Buffet Process: An Introduction and Review , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..