-
Learning to Discover Sparse Graphical Models
Authors:
Eugene Belilovsky,
Kyle Kastner,
Gaël Varoquaux,
Matthew Blaschko
Abstract:
We consider structure discovery of undirected graphical models from observational data. Inferring likely structures from few examples is a complex task often requiring the formulation of priors and sophisticated inference procedures. Popular methods rely on estimating a penalized maximum likelihood of the precision matrix. However, in these approaches structure recovery is an indirect consequence…
▽ More
We consider structure discovery of undirected graphical models from observational data. Inferring likely structures from few examples is a complex task often requiring the formulation of priors and sophisticated inference procedures. Popular methods rely on estimating a penalized maximum likelihood of the precision matrix. However, in these approaches structure recovery is an indirect consequence of the data-fit term, the penalty can be difficult to adapt for domain-specific knowledge, and the inference is computationally demanding. By contrast, it may be easier to generate training samples of data that arise from graphs with the desired structure properties. We propose here to leverage this latter source of information as training data to learn a function, parametrized by a neural network that maps empirical covariance matrices to estimated graph structures. Learning this function brings two benefits: it implicitly models the desired structure or sparsity properties to form suitable priors, and it can be tailored to the specific problem of edge structure discovery, rather than maximizing data likelihood. Applying this framework, we find our learnable graph-discovery method trained on synthetic data generalizes well: identifying relevant edges in both synthetic and real data, completely unknown at training time. We find that on genetics, brain imaging, and simulation data we obtain performance generally superior to analytical methods.
△ Less
Submitted 3 August, 2017; v1 submitted 20 May, 2016;
originally announced May 2016.
-
Testing for Differences in Gaussian Graphical Models: Applications to Brain Connectivity
Authors:
Eugene Belilovsky,
Gaël Varoquaux,
Matthew B. Blaschko
Abstract:
Functional brain networks are well described and estimated from data with Gaussian Graphical Models (GGMs), e.g. using sparse inverse covariance estimators. Comparing functional connectivity of subjects in two populations calls for comparing these estimated GGMs. Our goal is to identify differences in GGMs known to have similar structure. We characterize the uncertainty of differences with confide…
▽ More
Functional brain networks are well described and estimated from data with Gaussian Graphical Models (GGMs), e.g. using sparse inverse covariance estimators. Comparing functional connectivity of subjects in two populations calls for comparing these estimated GGMs. Our goal is to identify differences in GGMs known to have similar structure. We characterize the uncertainty of differences with confidence intervals obtained using a parametric distribution on parameters of a sparse estimator. Sparse penalties enable statistical guarantees and interpretable models even in high-dimensional and low-sample settings. Characterizing the distributions of sparse models is inherently challenging as the penalties produce a biased estimator. Recent work invokes the sparsity assumptions to effectively remove the bias from a sparse estimator such as the lasso. These distributions can be used to give confidence intervals on edges in GGMs, and by extension their differences. However, in the case of comparing GGMs, these estimators do not make use of any assumed joint structure among the GGMs. Inspired by priors from brain functional connectivity we derive the distribution of parameter differences under a joint penalty when parameters are known to be sparse in the difference. This leads us to introduce the debiased multi-task fused lasso, whose distribution can be characterized in an efficient manner. We then show how the debiased lasso and multi-task fused lasso can be used to obtain confidence intervals on edge differences in GGMs. We validate the techniques proposed on a set of synthetic examples as well as neuro-imaging dataset created for the study of autism.
△ Less
Submitted 18 November, 2016; v1 submitted 29 December, 2015;
originally announced December 2015.
-
A Test of Relative Similarity For Model Selection in Generative Models
Authors:
Wacha Bounliphone,
Eugene Belilovsky,
Matthew B. Blaschko,
Ioannis Antonoglou,
Arthur Gretton
Abstract:
Probabilistic generative models provide a powerful framework for representing data that avoids the expense of manual annotation typically needed by discriminative approaches. Model selection in this generative setting can be challenging, however, particularly when likelihoods are not easily accessible. To address this issue, we introduce a statistical test of relative similarity, which is used to…
▽ More
Probabilistic generative models provide a powerful framework for representing data that avoids the expense of manual annotation typically needed by discriminative approaches. Model selection in this generative setting can be challenging, however, particularly when likelihoods are not easily accessible. To address this issue, we introduce a statistical test of relative similarity, which is used to determine which of two models generates samples that are significantly closer to a real-world reference dataset of interest. We use as our test statistic the difference in maximum mean discrepancies (MMDs) between the reference dataset and each model dataset, and derive a powerful, low-variance test based on the joint asymptotic distribution of the MMDs between each reference-model pair. In experiments on deep generative models, including the variational auto-encoder and generative moment matching network, the tests provide a meaningful ranking of model performance as a function of parameter and training settings.
△ Less
Submitted 15 February, 2016; v1 submitted 14 November, 2015;
originally announced November 2015.