Safe Active Learning for Time-Series Modeling with Gaussian Processes

Learning time-series models is useful for many applications, such as simulation and forecasting. In this study, we consider the problem of actively learning time-series models while taking given safety constraints into account. For time-series modeling we employ a Gaussian process with a nonlinear exogenous input structure. The proposed approach generates data appropriate for time series model learning, i.e. input and output trajectories, by dynamically exploring the input space. The approach parametrizes the input trajectory as consecutive trajectory sections, which are determined stepwise given safety requirements and past observations. We analyze the proposed algorithm and evaluate it empirically on a technical application. The results show the effectiveness of our approach in a realistic technical use case.

[1]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  A Unifying View of Sparse Approximate Gaussian Process Regression , 2005, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[2]  Steven E. Rigdon,et al.  Model-Oriented Design of Experiments , 1997, Technometrics.

[3]  Duy Nguyen-Tuong,et al.  Safe Exploration for Active Learning with Gaussian Processes , 2015, ECML/PKDD.

[4]  S. Billings Nonlinear System Identification: NARMAX Methods in the Time, Frequency, and Spatio-Temporal Domains , 2013 .

[5]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Bayesian optimization with safety constraints: safe and automatic parameter tuning in robotics , 2016, Machine Learning.

[6]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Sparse Gaussian Processes using Pseudo-inputs , 2005, NIPS.

[7]  M. Seeger Low Rank Updates for the Cholesky Decomposition , 2004 .

[8]  Rik Pintelon,et al.  System Identification: A Frequency Domain Approach , 2012 .

[9]  Tom Minka,et al.  Expectation Propagation for approximate Bayesian inference , 2001, UAI.

[10]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  Information-Based Objective Functions for Active Data Selection , 1992, Neural Computation.

[11]  Ulrich Konigorski,et al.  Model-based calibration of engine controller using automated transient design of experiment , 2014 .

[12]  Peter Auer,et al.  Using Confidence Bounds for Exploitation-Exploration Trade-offs , 2003, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[13]  Joachim Rückert,et al.  Online Dynamic Black Box Modelling and Adaptive Experiment Design in Combustion Engine Calibration , 2010 .

[14]  Pieter Abbeel,et al.  Safe Exploration in Markov Decision Processes , 2012, ICML.

[15]  T. Coleman,et al.  On the Convergence of Reflective Newton Methods for Large-scale Nonlinear Minimization Subject to Bounds , 1992 .

[16]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[17]  Joel W. Burdick,et al.  Stagewise Safe Bayesian Optimization with Gaussian Processes , 2018, ICML.

[18]  Susanne Zaglauer,et al.  Design of Experiments for nonlinear dynamic system identification , 2011 .

[19]  Michalis K. Titsias,et al.  Variational Learning of Inducing Variables in Sparse Gaussian Processes , 2009, AISTATS.

[20]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  A trust region method based on interior point techniques for nonlinear programming , 2000, Math. Program..

[21]  Michèle Sebag,et al.  Exploration vs Exploitation vs Safety: Risk-Aware Multi-Armed Bandits , 2013, ACML.

[22]  Peter Geibel,et al.  Reinforcement Learning with Bounded Risk , 2001, ICML.

[23]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Near-optimal sensor placements in Gaussian processes , 2005, ICML.