Showing 1–14 of 14 results for author: Ober, S W

Active learning for affinity prediction of antibodies

Authors: Alexandra Gessner, Sebastian W. Ober, Owen Vickery, Dino Oglić, Talip Uçar

Abstract: The primary objective of most lead optimization campaigns is to enhance the binding affinity of ligands. For large molecules such as antibodies, identifying mutations that enhance antibody affinity is particularly challenging due to the combinatorial explosion of potential mutations. When the structure of the antibody-antigen complex is available, relative binding free energy (RBFE) methods can of… ▽ More The primary objective of most lead optimization campaigns is to enhance the binding affinity of ligands. For large molecules such as antibodies, identifying mutations that enhance antibody affinity is particularly challenging due to the combinatorial explosion of potential mutations. When the structure of the antibody-antigen complex is available, relative binding free energy (RBFE) methods can offer valuable insights into how different mutations will impact the potency and selectivity of a drug candidate, thereby reducing the reliance on costly and time-consuming wet-lab experiments. However, accurately simulating the physics of large molecules is computationally intensive. We present an active learning framework that iteratively proposes promising sequences for simulators to evaluate, thereby accelerating the search for improved binders. We explore different modeling approaches to identify the most effective surrogate model for this task, and evaluate our framework both using pre-computed pools of data and in a realistic full-loop setting. △ Less

Submitted 11 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Recommendations for Baselines and Benchmarking Approximate Gaussian Processes

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober, Artem Artemev, Marcel Wagenländer, Rudolfs Grobins, Mark van der Wilk

Abstract: Gaussian processes (GPs) are a mature and widely-used component of the ML toolbox. One of their desirable qualities is automatic hyperparameter selection, which allows for training without user intervention. However, in many realistic settings, approximations are typically needed, which typically do require tuning. We argue that this requirement for tuning complicates evaluation, which has led to… ▽ More Gaussian processes (GPs) are a mature and widely-used component of the ML toolbox. One of their desirable qualities is automatic hyperparameter selection, which allows for training without user intervention. However, in many realistic settings, approximations are typically needed, which typically do require tuning. We argue that this requirement for tuning complicates evaluation, which has led to a lack of a clear recommendations on which method should be used in which situation. To address this, we make recommendations for comparing GP approximations based on a specification of what a user should expect from a method. In addition, we develop a training procedure for the variational method of Titsias [2009] that leaves no choices to the user, and show that this is a strong baseline that meets our specification. We conclude that benchmarking according to our suggestions gives a clearer view of the current state of the field, and uncovers problems that are still open that future papers should address. △ Less

Submitted 15 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Comments: Preprint. 25 pages, 16 figures

Towards Improved Variational Inference for Deep Bayesian Models

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober

Abstract: Deep learning has revolutionized the last decade, being at the forefront of extraordinary advances in a wide range of tasks including computer vision, natural language processing, and reinforcement learning, to name but a few. However, it is well-known that deep models trained via maximum likelihood estimation tend to be overconfident and give poorly-calibrated predictions. Bayesian deep learning… ▽ More Deep learning has revolutionized the last decade, being at the forefront of extraordinary advances in a wide range of tasks including computer vision, natural language processing, and reinforcement learning, to name but a few. However, it is well-known that deep models trained via maximum likelihood estimation tend to be overconfident and give poorly-calibrated predictions. Bayesian deep learning attempts to address this by placing priors on the model parameters, which are then combined with a likelihood to perform posterior inference. Unfortunately, for deep models, the true posterior is intractable, forcing the user to resort to approximations. In this thesis, we explore the use of variational inference (VI) as an approximation, as it is unique in simultaneously approximating the posterior and providing a lower bound to the marginal likelihood. If tight enough, this lower bound can be used to optimize hyperparameters and to facilitate model selection. However, this capacity has rarely been used to its full extent for Bayesian neural networks, likely because the approximate posteriors typically used in practice can lack the flexibility to effectively bound the marginal likelihood. We therefore explore three aspects of Bayesian learning for deep models: 1) we ask whether it is necessary to perform inference over as many parameters as possible, or whether it is reasonable to treat many of them as optimizable hyperparameters; 2) we propose a variational posterior that provides a unified view of inference in Bayesian neural networks and deep Gaussian processes; 3) we demonstrate how VI can be improved in certain deep Gaussian process models by analytically removing symmetries from the posterior, and performing inference on Gram matrices instead of features. We hope that our contributions will provide a step** stone to fully realize the promises of VI in the future. △ Less

Submitted 22 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Comments: PhD Thesis; University of Cambridge

Trieste: Efficiently Exploring The Depths of Black-box Functions with TensorFlow

Authors: Victor Picheny, Joel Berkeley, Henry B. Moss, Hrvoje Stojic, Uri Granta, Sebastian W. Ober, Artem Artemev, Khurram Ghani, Alexander Goodall, Andrei Paleyes, Sattar Vakili, Sergio Pascual-Diaz, Stratis Markou, Jixiang Qing, Nasrulloh R. B. S Loka, Ivo Couckuyt

Abstract: We present Trieste, an open-source Python package for Bayesian optimization and active learning benefiting from the scalability and efficiency of TensorFlow. Our library enables the plug-and-play of popular TensorFlow-based models within sequential decision-making loops, e.g. Gaussian processes from GPflow or GPflux, or neural networks from Keras. This modular mindset is central to the package and… ▽ More We present Trieste, an open-source Python package for Bayesian optimization and active learning benefiting from the scalability and efficiency of TensorFlow. Our library enables the plug-and-play of popular TensorFlow-based models within sequential decision-making loops, e.g. Gaussian processes from GPflow or GPflux, or neural networks from Keras. This modular mindset is central to the package and extends to our acquisition functions and the internal dynamics of the decision-making loop, both of which can be tailored and extended by researchers or engineers when tackling custom use cases. Trieste is a research-friendly and production-ready toolkit backed by a comprehensive test suite, extensive documentation, and available at https://github.com/secondmind-labs/trieste. △ Less

Submitted 16 February, 2023; originally announced February 2023.

Inducing Point Allocation for Sparse Gaussian Processes in High-Throughput Bayesian Optimisation

Authors: Henry B. Moss, Sebastian W. Ober, Victor Picheny

Abstract: Sparse Gaussian Processes are a key component of high-throughput Bayesian Optimisation (BO) loops; however, we show that existing methods for allocating their inducing points severely hamper optimisation performance. By exploiting the quality-diversity decomposition of Determinantal Point Processes, we propose the first inducing point allocation strategy designed specifically for use in BO. Unlike… ▽ More Sparse Gaussian Processes are a key component of high-throughput Bayesian Optimisation (BO) loops; however, we show that existing methods for allocating their inducing points severely hamper optimisation performance. By exploiting the quality-diversity decomposition of Determinantal Point Processes, we propose the first inducing point allocation strategy designed specifically for use in BO. Unlike existing methods which seek only to reduce global uncertainty in the objective function, our approach provides the local high-fidelity modelling of promising regions required for precise optimisation. More generally, we demonstrate that our proposed framework provides a flexible way to allocate modelling capacity in sparse models and so is suitable broad range of downstream sequential decision making tasks. △ Less

Submitted 23 February, 2023; v1 submitted 24 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.

Information-theoretic Inducing Point Placement for High-throughput Bayesian Optimisation

Authors: Henry B. Moss, Sebastian W. Ober, Victor Picheny

Abstract: Sparse Gaussian Processes are a key component of high-throughput Bayesian optimisation (BO) loops -- an increasingly common setting where evaluation budgets are large and highly parallelised. By using representative subsets of the available data to build approximate posteriors, sparse models dramatically reduce the computational costs of surrogate modelling by relying on a small set of pseudo-obse… ▽ More Sparse Gaussian Processes are a key component of high-throughput Bayesian optimisation (BO) loops -- an increasingly common setting where evaluation budgets are large and highly parallelised. By using representative subsets of the available data to build approximate posteriors, sparse models dramatically reduce the computational costs of surrogate modelling by relying on a small set of pseudo-observations, the so-called inducing points, in lieu of the full data set. However, current approaches to design inducing points are not appropriate within BO loops as they seek to reduce global uncertainty in the objective function. Thus, the high-fidelity modelling of promising and data-dense regions required for precise optimisation is sacrificed and computational resources are instead wasted on modelling areas of the space already known to be sub-optimal. Inspired by entropy-based BO methods, we propose a novel inducing point design that uses a principled information-theoretic criterion to select inducing points. By choosing inducing points to maximally reduce both global uncertainty and uncertainty in the maximum value of the objective function, we build surrogate models able to support high-precision high-throughput BO. △ Less

Submitted 13 July, 2022; v1 submitted 6 June, 2022; originally announced June 2022.

A variational approximate posterior for the deep Wishart process

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober, Laurence Aitchison

Abstract: Recent work introduced deep kernel processes as an entirely kernel-based alternative to NNs (Aitchison et al. 2020). Deep kernel processes flexibly learn good top-layer representations by alternately sampling the kernel from a distribution over positive semi-definite matrices and performing nonlinear transformations. A particular deep kernel process, the deep Wishart process (DWP), is of particula… ▽ More Recent work introduced deep kernel processes as an entirely kernel-based alternative to NNs (Aitchison et al. 2020). Deep kernel processes flexibly learn good top-layer representations by alternately sampling the kernel from a distribution over positive semi-definite matrices and performing nonlinear transformations. A particular deep kernel process, the deep Wishart process (DWP), is of particular interest because its prior can be made equivalent to deep Gaussian process (DGP) priors for kernels that can be expressed entirely in terms of Gram matrices. However, inference in DWPs has not yet been possible due to the lack of sufficiently flexible distributions over positive semi-definite matrices. Here, we give a novel approach to obtaining flexible distributions over positive semi-definite matrices by generalising the Bartlett decomposition of the Wishart probability density. We use this new distribution to develop an approximate posterior for the DWP that includes dependency across layers. We develop a doubly-stochastic inducing-point inference scheme for the DWP and show experimentally that inference in the DWP can improve performance over doing inference in a DGP with the equivalent prior. △ Less

Submitted 3 December, 2021; v1 submitted 21 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

Comments: Accepted for publication at the 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2021). 23 pages

Last Layer Marginal Likelihood for Invariance Learning

Authors: Pola Schwöbel, Martin Jørgensen, Sebastian W. Ober, Mark van der Wilk

Abstract: Data augmentation is often used to incorporate inductive biases into models. Traditionally, these are hand-crafted and tuned with cross validation. The Bayesian paradigm for model selection provides a path towards end-to-end learning of invariances using only the training data, by optimising the marginal likelihood. Computing the marginal likelihood is hard for neural networks, but success with tr… ▽ More Data augmentation is often used to incorporate inductive biases into models. Traditionally, these are hand-crafted and tuned with cross validation. The Bayesian paradigm for model selection provides a path towards end-to-end learning of invariances using only the training data, by optimising the marginal likelihood. Computing the marginal likelihood is hard for neural networks, but success with tractable approaches that compute the marginal likelihood for the last layer only raises the question of whether this convenient approach might be employed for learning invariances. We show partial success on standard benchmarks, in the low-data regime and on a medical imaging dataset by designing a custom optimisation routine. Introducing a new lower bound to the marginal likelihood allows us to perform inference for a larger class of likelihood functions than before. On the other hand, we demonstrate failure modes on the CIFAR10 dataset, where the last layer approximation is not sufficient due to the increased complexity of our neural network. Our results indicate that once more sophisticated approximations become available the marginal likelihood is a promising approach for invariance learning in neural networks. △ Less

Submitted 1 March, 2022; v1 submitted 14 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Comments: AISTATS '22

The Promises and Pitfalls of Deep Kernel Learning

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober, Carl E. Rasmussen, Mark van der Wilk

Abstract: Deep kernel learning (DKL) and related techniques aim to combine the representational power of neural networks with the reliable uncertainty estimates of Gaussian processes. One crucial aspect of these models is an expectation that, because they are treated as Gaussian process models optimized using the marginal likelihood, they are protected from overfitting. However, we identify situations where… ▽ More Deep kernel learning (DKL) and related techniques aim to combine the representational power of neural networks with the reliable uncertainty estimates of Gaussian processes. One crucial aspect of these models is an expectation that, because they are treated as Gaussian process models optimized using the marginal likelihood, they are protected from overfitting. However, we identify situations where this is not the case. We explore this behavior, explain its origins and consider how it applies to real datasets. Through careful experimentation on the UCI, CIFAR-10, and the UTKFace datasets, we find that the overfitting from overparameterized maximum marginal likelihood, in which the model is "somewhat Bayesian", can in certain scenarios be worse than that from not being Bayesian at all. We explain how and when DKL can still be successful by investigating optimization dynamics. We also find that failures of DKL can be rectified by a fully Bayesian treatment, which leads to the desired performance improvements over standard neural networks and Gaussian processes. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2021; v1 submitted 24 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Comments: Accepted for the 37th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 2021), 20 pages

Bayesian Neural Network Priors Revisited

Authors: Vincent Fortuin, Adrià Garriga-Alonso, Sebastian W. Ober, Florian Wenzel, Gunnar Rätsch, Richard E. Turner, Mark van der Wilk, Laurence Aitchison

Abstract: Isotropic Gaussian priors are the de facto standard for modern Bayesian neural network inference. However, it is unclear whether these priors accurately reflect our true beliefs about the weight distributions or give optimal performance. To find better priors, we study summary statistics of neural network weights in networks trained using stochastic gradient descent (SGD). We find that convolution… ▽ More Isotropic Gaussian priors are the de facto standard for modern Bayesian neural network inference. However, it is unclear whether these priors accurately reflect our true beliefs about the weight distributions or give optimal performance. To find better priors, we study summary statistics of neural network weights in networks trained using stochastic gradient descent (SGD). We find that convolutional neural network (CNN) and ResNet weights display strong spatial correlations, while fully connected networks (FCNNs) display heavy-tailed weight distributions. We show that building these observations into priors can lead to improved performance on a variety of image classification datasets. Surprisingly, these priors mitigate the cold posterior effect in FCNNs, but slightly increase the cold posterior effect in ResNets. △ Less

Submitted 16 March, 2022; v1 submitted 12 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Comments: Accepted at ICLR 2022

Understanding Variational Inference in Function-Space

Authors: David R. Burt, Sebastian W. Ober, Adrià Garriga-Alonso, Mark van der Wilk

Abstract: Recent work has attempted to directly approximate the `function-space' or predictive posterior distribution of Bayesian models, without approximating the posterior distribution over the parameters. This is appealing in e.g. Bayesian neural networks, where we only need the former, and the latter is hard to represent. In this work, we highlight some advantages and limitations of employing the Kullba… ▽ More Recent work has attempted to directly approximate the `function-space' or predictive posterior distribution of Bayesian models, without approximating the posterior distribution over the parameters. This is appealing in e.g. Bayesian neural networks, where we only need the former, and the latter is hard to represent. In this work, we highlight some advantages and limitations of employing the Kullback-Leibler divergence in this setting. For example, we show that minimizing the KL divergence between a wide class of parametric distributions and the posterior induced by a (non-degenerate) Gaussian process prior leads to an ill-defined objective function. Then, we propose (featurized) Bayesian linear regression as a benchmark for `function-space' inference methods that directly measures approximation quality. We apply this methodology to assess aspects of the objective function and inference scheme considered in Sun, Zhang, Shi, and Grosse (2018), emphasizing the quality of approximation to Bayesian inference as opposed to predictive performance. △ Less

Submitted 18 November, 2020; originally announced November 2020.

Comments: 19 pages

Deep kernel processes

Authors: Laurence Aitchison, Adam X. Yang, Sebastian W. Ober

Abstract: We define deep kernel processes in which positive definite Gram matrices are progressively transformed by nonlinear kernel functions and by sampling from (inverse) Wishart distributions. Remarkably, we find that deep Gaussian processes (DGPs), Bayesian neural networks (BNNs), infinite BNNs, and infinite BNNs with bottlenecks can all be written as deep kernel processes. For DGPs the equivalence ari… ▽ More We define deep kernel processes in which positive definite Gram matrices are progressively transformed by nonlinear kernel functions and by sampling from (inverse) Wishart distributions. Remarkably, we find that deep Gaussian processes (DGPs), Bayesian neural networks (BNNs), infinite BNNs, and infinite BNNs with bottlenecks can all be written as deep kernel processes. For DGPs the equivalence arises because the Gram matrix formed by the inner product of features is Wishart distributed, and as we show, standard isotropic kernels can be written entirely in terms of this Gram matrix -- we do not need knowledge of the underlying features. We define a tractable deep kernel process, the deep inverse Wishart process, and give a doubly-stochastic inducing-point variational inference scheme that operates on the Gram matrices, not on the features, as in DGPs. We show that the deep inverse Wishart process gives superior performance to DGPs and infinite BNNs on standard fully-connected baselines. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2021; v1 submitted 4 October, 2020; originally announced October 2020.

Comments: 21 pages

Global inducing point variational posteriors for Bayesian neural networks and deep Gaussian processes

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober, Laurence Aitchison

Abstract: We consider the optimal approximate posterior over the top-layer weights in a Bayesian neural network for regression, and show that it exhibits strong dependencies on the lower-layer weights. We adapt this result to develop a correlated approximate posterior over the weights at all layers in a Bayesian neural network. We extend this approach to deep Gaussian processes, unifying inference in the tw… ▽ More We consider the optimal approximate posterior over the top-layer weights in a Bayesian neural network for regression, and show that it exhibits strong dependencies on the lower-layer weights. We adapt this result to develop a correlated approximate posterior over the weights at all layers in a Bayesian neural network. We extend this approach to deep Gaussian processes, unifying inference in the two model classes. Our approximate posterior uses learned "global" inducing points, which are defined only at the input layer and propagated through the network to obtain inducing inputs at subsequent layers. By contrast, standard, "local", inducing point methods from the deep Gaussian process literature optimise a separate set of inducing inputs at every layer, and thus do not model correlations across layers. Our method gives state-of-the-art performance for a variational Bayesian method, without data augmentation or tempering, on CIFAR-10 of 86.7%, which is comparable to SGMCMC without tempering but with data augmentation (88% in Wenzel et al. 2020). △ Less

Submitted 22 June, 2021; v1 submitted 16 May, 2020; originally announced May 2020.

Comments: Accepted for publication at the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2021, PMLR 139), 33 pages

Benchmarking the Neural Linear Model for Regression

Authors: Sebastian W. Ober, Carl Edward Rasmussen

Abstract: The neural linear model is a simple adaptive Bayesian linear regression method that has recently been used in a number of problems ranging from Bayesian optimization to reinforcement learning. Despite its apparent successes in these settings, to the best of our knowledge there has been no systematic exploration of its capabilities on simple regression tasks. In this work we characterize these on t… ▽ More The neural linear model is a simple adaptive Bayesian linear regression method that has recently been used in a number of problems ranging from Bayesian optimization to reinforcement learning. Despite its apparent successes in these settings, to the best of our knowledge there has been no systematic exploration of its capabilities on simple regression tasks. In this work we characterize these on the UCI datasets, a popular benchmark for Bayesian regression models, as well as on the recently introduced UCI "gap" datasets, which are better tests of out-of-distribution uncertainty. We demonstrate that the neural linear model is a simple method that shows generally good performance on these tasks, but at the cost of requiring good hyperparameter tuning. △ Less

Submitted 18 December, 2019; originally announced December 2019.

Comments: Advances in Approximate Bayesian Inference (AABI 2019)