Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
173 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Bayesian Nonparametrics: An Alternative to Deep Learning (2404.00085v1)

Published 29 Mar 2024 in cs.LG and stat.ML

Abstract: Bayesian nonparametric models offer a flexible and powerful framework for statistical model selection, enabling the adaptation of model complexity to the intricacies of diverse datasets. This survey intends to delve into the significance of Bayesian nonparametrics, particularly in addressing complex challenges across various domains such as statistics, computer science, and electrical engineering. By elucidating the basic properties and theoretical foundations of these nonparametric models, this survey aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of Bayesian nonparametrics and their relevance in addressing complex problems, particularly in the domain of multi-object tracking. Through this exploration, we uncover the versatility and efficacy of Bayesian nonparametric methodologies, paving the way for innovative solutions to intricate challenges across diverse disciplines.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (120)
  1. Aldous, D. J. (1985). “Exchangeability and related topics.” In École d’Été de Probabilités de Saint-Flour XIII—1983, 1–198. Springer.
  2. Ecole d’Ete de Probabilites de Saint-Flour XIII, 1983, volume 1117. Springer.
  3. “An introduction to MCMC for machine learning.” Machine learning, 50(1-2): 5–43.
  4. Antoniak, C. E. (1974). “Mixtures of Dirichlet processes with applications to Bayesian nonparametric problems.” The annals of statistics, 1152–1174.
  5. “Size bias for one and all.” Project Euclid.
  6. “The consistency of posterior distributions in nonparametric problems.” The Annals of Statistics, 27(2): 536–561.
  7. Bayesian Theory. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. Wiley. URL https://books.google.com/books?id=cl6nAAAACAAJ
  8. “Ferguson distributions via Pólya urn schemes.” The annals of statistics, 1(2): 353–355.
  9. “The nested chinese restaurant process and bayesian nonparametric inference of topic hierarchies.” Journal of the ACM (JACM), 57(2): 1–30.
  10. “Variational inference for Dirichlet process mixtures.” Project Euclid.
  11. “Variational inference: A review for statisticians.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112(518): 859–877.
  12. “A hierarchical Pitman-Yor process HMM for unsupervised part of speech induction.” In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 865–874.
  13. Brown, D. P. (2008). “Efficient functional clustering of protein sequences using the Dirichlet process.” Bioinformatics, 24(16): 1765–1771.
  14. Brown, L. D. (1986). “Fundamentals of statistical exponential families: with applications in statistical decision theory.” Ims.
  15. “Inferring latent states and refining force estimates via hierarchical Dirichlet process modeling in single particle tracking experiments.” PloS one, 10(9): e0137633.
  16. “Dynamic clustering via asymptotics of the dependent Dirichlet process mixture.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 26.
  17. “Stick-Breaking Dependent Beta Processes with Variational Inference.” Neural Processing Letters, 53(1): 339–353.
  18. “Generalized Pólya urn for time-varying Dirichlet process mixtures.” In Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 33–40.
  19. “Bayesian inference for linear dynamic models with Dirichlet process mixtures.” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 56(1): 71–84.
  20. “Generalized P {{\{{\\\backslash\’o}}\}} lya Urn for Time-Varying Pitman-Yor Processes.” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 18(27): 1–32.
  21. Statistical Inference. Duxbury advanced series in statistics and decision sciences. Duxbury.
  22. “Learning image attributes using the Indian Buffet Process.” Technical report, Technical report, Brown University, 2012. 2.
  23. “The Hierarchical Beta Process for Convolutional Factor Analysis and Deep Learning.” In ICML, 361–368.
  24. “Phylogenetic Indian buffet process: Theory and applications in integrative analysis of cancer genomics.”
  25. “Hidden Markov model using Dirichlet process for de-identification.” Journal of biomedical informatics, 58: S60–S66.
  26. “The supervised hierarchical Dirichlet process.” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 37(2): 243–255.
  27. “On consistency of Gibbs-type priors.” In Proceedings of the 58th World Statistics Congress of ISI.
  28. “Interactive image segmentation using Dirichlet process multiple-view learning.” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 21(4): 2119–2129.
  29. “Variational inference for the Indian buffet process.” In Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 137–144. PMLR.
  30. “Discovering morphological paradigms from plain text using a Dirichlet process mixture model.” In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 616–627.
  31. Escobar, M. D. (1994). “Estimating normal means with a Dirichlet process prior.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89(425): 268–277.
  32. “Bayesian density estimation and inference using mixtures.” Journal of the american statistical association, 90(430): 577–588.
  33. Ferguson, T. S. (1973). “A Bayesian analysis of some nonparametric problems.” The annals of statistics, 209–230.
  34. “Bayesian nonparametric inference of switching dynamic linear models.” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 59: 1569–1585.
  35. “Hierarchical Dirichlet processes for tracking maneuvering targets.” In 2007 10th international conference on information fusion, 1–8. IEEE.
  36. “Tracking and connecting topics via incremental hierarchical Dirichlet processes.” In 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining, 1056–1061. IEEE.
  37. Bayesian data analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
  38. “Infinite latent feature models and the Indian buffet process.” Advances in neural information processing systems, 18.
  39. “Posterior consistency of Dirichlet mixtures in density estimation.” Ann. Statist, 27(1): 143–158.
  40. “Posterior convergence rates of Dirichlet mixtures at smooth densities.” The Annals of Statistics, 35(2): 697–723.
  41. Fundamentals of nonparametric Bayesian inference, volume 44. Cambridge University Press.
  42. “Producing power-law distributions and damping word frequencies with two-stage language models.” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12(Jul): 2335–2382.
  43. “A choice model with infinitely many latent features.” In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning, 361–368.
  44. “Hierarchical topic models and the nested Chinese restaurant process.” Advances in neural information processing systems, 16.
  45. “The Indian Buffet Process: An Introduction and Review.” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12(4).
  46. “Explaining Deep Learning Models–A Bayesian Non-parametric Approach.” Advances in neural information processing systems, 31.
  47. “Beta diffusion trees.” In International Conference on Machine Learning, 1809–1817. PMLR.
  48. Bayesian nonparametrics, volume 28. Cambridge University Press.
  49. Hoff, P. D. (2009). A first course in Bayesian statistical methods, volume 580. Springer.
  50. “Modeling images using transformed Indian buffet processes.” In International Conference of Machine Learning, volume 8. Citeseer.
  51. “Markov chain Monte Carlo in approximate Dirichlet and beta two-parameter process hierarchical models.” Biometrika, 87(2): 371–390.
  52. “A split-merge Markov chain Monte Carlo procedure for the Dirichlet process mixture model.” Journal of computational and Graphical Statistics, 13(1): 158–182.
  53. James, L. F. (2013). “Stick-breaking PG (\\\backslash\alpha,\\\backslash\zeta)-Generalized Gamma Processes.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.6570.
  54. — (2019). “Stick-breaking Pitman-Yor processes given the species sampling size.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.07186.
  55. Jordan, M. I. (2010). “Hierarchical models, nested models and completely random measures.” Frontiers of Statistical Decision Making and Bayesian Analysis: In Honor of James O. Berger, 207–217.
  56. Kallenberg, O. (1997). Foundations of modern probability, volume 2. Springer.
  57. Kingman, J. (1967). “Completely random measures.” Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 21(1): 59–78.
  58. Kingman, J. F. C. (1992). Poisson processes, volume 3. Clarendon Press.
  59. “Pitman-Yor diffusion trees.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1106.2494.
  60. — (2014). “Pitman yor diffusion trees for bayesian hierarchical clustering.” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 37(2): 271–289.
  61. “Collapsed Variational Dirichlet Process Mixture Models.” In IJCAI, volume 7, 2796–2801.
  62. “Hierarchical Bayesian nonparametric models for knowledge discovery from electronic medical records.” Knowledge-Based Systems, 99: 168–182.
  63. “Bayesian inference with dependent normalized completely random measures.” Project Euclid.
  64. “Investigating nonparametric priors with Gibbs structure.” Statistica Sinica, 1653–1668.
  65. “Models beyond the Dirichlet process.” Bayesian nonparametrics, 28(80): 342.
  66. “Construction of dependent Dirichlet processes based on Poisson processes.” Advances in neural information processing systems, 23.
  67. “Shared differential clustering across single-cell RNA sequencing datasets with the hierarchical Dirichlet process.” Econometrics and Statistics.
  68. “Variational Bayesian learning for Dirichlet process mixture of inverted Dirichlet distributions in non-Gaussian image feature modeling.” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 30(2): 449–463.
  69. MacEachern, S. N. (1994). “Estimating normal means with a conjugate style Dirichlet process prior.” Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 23(3): 727–741.
  70. — (1999). “Dependent nonparametric processes.” In Proceedings of the Bayesian Statistical Science Section.
  71. — (2000a). “Dependent Dirichlet processes.” Technical report, Department of Statistics, Ohio State University.
  72. — (2000b). “Dependent Dirichlet processes.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Statistics, Ohio State University.
  73. — (2016). “Nonparametric Bayesian methods: a gentle introduction and overview.” Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods, 23(6): 445–466.
  74. MacEarchern, S. N. (1998). “Computational Methods for Mixture of Dirichlet Process models.” In Dey, D., Müller, P., and Sinha, D. (eds.), Practical Nonparametric and Semiparametric Bayesian Statistics, volume 133. Springer.
  75. MacKay, D. J. (1998). “Introduction to monte carlo methods.” In Learning in graphical models, 175–204. Springer.
  76. Information theory, inference and learning algorithms. Cambridge university press.
  77. “A hierarchical Dirichlet language model.” Natural language engineering, 1(3): 289–308.
  78. “Batch and online variational learning of hierarchical Dirichlet process mixtures of multivariate Beta distributions in medical applications.” Pattern Analysis and Applications, 24(4): 1731–1744.
  79. Moraffah, B. (2019). Bayesian nonparametric modeling and inference for multiple object tracking. Arizona State University.
  80. “Use of hierarchical Dirichlet processes to integrate dependent observations from multiple disparate sensors for tracking.” In 2019 22th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), 1–7. IEEE.
  81. “Dependent Dirichlet process modeling and identity learning for multiple object tracking.” In 2018 52nd Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, 1762–1766. IEEE.
  82. “Random Infinite Tree and Dependent Poisson Diffusion Process for Nonparametric Bayesian Modeling in Multiple Object Tracking.” In ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 5217–5221.
  83. — (2019b). “Tracking Multiple Objects with Dependent Measurements Using Bayesian Nonparametric Modeling.” In 2019 53rdAsilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers.
  84. “Nonparametric Bayesian methods and the dependent Pitman-Yor process for modeling evolution in multiple object tracking.” In 2019 22th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), 1–6. IEEE.
  85. Neal, R. M. (2000). “Markov chain sampling methods for Dirichlet process mixture models.” Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 9: 249–265.
  86. “High dimensional classification with Bayesian neural networks and Dirichlet diffusion trees.” Feature extraction: Foundations and applications, 265–296.
  87. Neal, R. M. et al. (2003). “Density modeling and clustering using Dirichlet diffusion trees.” Bayesian statistics, 7: 619–629.
  88. “The dependent Dirichlet process mixture of objects for detection-free tracking and object modeling.” In Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 660–668. PMLR.
  89. Newman, M. E. (2005). “Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law.” Contemporary physics, 46(5): 323–351.
  90. “Dirichlet mixtures, the Dirichlet process, and the structure of protein space.” Journal of computational biology, 20(1): 1–18.
  91. “Bayesian Nonparametric Models.” Encyclopedia of machine learning, 1: 81–89.
  92. “Nonparametric factor analysis with beta process priors.” In Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning, 777–784.
  93. “Nested hierarchical Dirichlet processes.” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 37(2): 256–270.
  94. “Size-biased sampling of Poisson point processes and excursions.” Probability Theory and Related Fields, 92(1): 21–39.
  95. Conditionally dependent Dirichlet processes for modelling naturally correlated data sources. Citeseer.
  96. Pitman, J. (2002). “Poisson-Dirichlet and GEM invariant distributions for split-and-merge transformations of an interval partition.” Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 11(5): 501–514.
  97. — (2003). “Poisson-kingman partitions.” Lecture Notes-Monograph Series, 1–34.
  98. “The two-parameter Poisson-Dirichlet distribution derived from a stable subordinator.” The Annals of Probability, 855–900.
  99. ‘‘Case-control Indian buffet process identifies biomarkers of response to Codrituzumab.” BMC cancer, 19: 1–7.
  100. “The dependent Dirichlet process and related models.” Statistical Science, 37(1): 24–41.
  101. “Modeling and visualizing uncertainty in gene expression clusters using Dirichlet process mixtures.” IEEE/ACM transactions on computational biology and bioinformatics, 6(4): 615–628.
  102. Robert, C. (2007). The Bayesian choice: from decision-theoretic foundations to computational implementation. Springer Science & Business Media.
  103. Monte Carlo statistical methods. Springer Science & Business Media.
  104. “The nested Dirichlet process.” Journal of the American statistical Association, 103(483): 1131–1154.
  105. Scheaffer, R. (1972). “Size-biased sampling.” Technometrics, 14(3): 635–644.
  106. Sethuraman, J. (1994). “A constructive definition of Dirichlet priors.” Statistica sinica, 639–650.
  107. “An overview of nonparametric bayesian models and applications to natural language processing.” Science, 71–93.
  108. Sudderth, E. B. (2006). “Graphical models for visual object recognition and tracking.” Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  109. Teh, Y. W. (2006). “A hierarchical Bayesian language model based on Pitman-Yor processes.” In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 985–992.
  110. “Sharing clusters among related groups: Hierarchical Dirichlet processes.” In Advances in neural information processing systems, 1385–1392.
  111. — (2006). “Hierarchical Dirichlet Processes.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1566–1581.
  112. “Hierarchical Beta Processes and the Indian Buffet Process.” In Meila, M. and Shen, X. (eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, volume 2 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 564–571. San Juan, Puerto Rico: PMLR. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v2/thibaux07a.html
  113. Tierney, L. (1994). “Markov chains for exploring posterior distributions.” the Annals of Statistics, 1701–1728.
  114. Venkataraman, A. (2001). “A statistical model for word discovery in transcribed speech.” Computational Linguistics, 27(3): 351–372.
  115. “Graphical models, exponential families, and variational inference.” Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning, 1(1–2): 1–305.
  116. ‘‘Variational inference for the nested Chinese restaurant process.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 22.
  117. “Online variational inference for the hierarchical Dirichlet process.” In Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on artificial intelligence and statistics, 752–760. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings.
  118. “Parallel Markov chain Monte Carlo for nonparametric mixture models.” In International Conference on Machine Learning, 98–106. PMLR.
  119. “Dependent Indian Buffet Processes.” In Teh, Y. W. and Titterington, M. (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, volume 9 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 924–931. Chia Laguna Resort, Sardinia, Italy: PMLR. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v9/williamson10a.html
  120. “Annotating images and image objects using a hierarchical dirichlet process model.” In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Multimedia Data Mining: held in conjunction with the ACM SIGKDD 2008, 1–7.
Citations (1)

Summary

  • The paper presents BNP models as flexible alternatives to deep learning by avoiding fixed-dimension constraints and inherently quantifying uncertainty.
  • It details key BNP methods like the Dirichlet Process, IBP, and Pitman-Yor Process for clustering and latent feature extraction.
  • The study highlights BNP's potential to enhance interpretability and scalability, paving the way for promising hybrid approaches with deep learning.

Bayesian Nonparametrics: An Alternative to Deep Learning

The paper "Bayesian Nonparametrics: An Alternative to Deep Learning" explores the potential and versatility of Bayesian nonparametric (BNP) methods as a complementary or alternative approach to deep learning. As deep learning has become a dominant paradigm in AI, it is crucial to recognize the limitations and challenges it faces, especially in areas characterized by data scarcity, uncertainty, and the need for model interpretability. BNP methods offer a promising solution by providing flexible statistical frameworks that can adapt to the complexities inherent in diverse datasets.

Bayesian Nonparametrics Overview

BNP models are built on the Bayesian framework, but instead of assuming a fixed-dimensional parameter space, they operate within infinite-dimensional parameter spaces. This flexibility enables them to model complex structures without needing to predefine model complexity, a stark contrast to deep learning's reliance on fixed architectures. The paper highlights several key BNP models, such as the Dirichlet Process (DP), Indian Buffet Process (IBP), and the Pitman-Yor Process (PYP), each offering unique properties to tackle distinct data challenges.

Dirichlet Process (DP): The DP is a fundamental BNP model often employed for clustering problems. It defines a distribution over probability distributions, allowing for an unknown number of clusters that grow with the data. The paper discusses several ways to construct and interpret the DP, such as Ferguson's foundational work and the stick-breaking construction.

Indian Buffet Process (IBP): The IBP is particularly useful for modeling problems with latent feature structures, offering a framework to infer the number of features from the data. It draws upon concepts from the Dirichlet Process and can be employed in areas where a binary representation of features is needed.

Pitman-Yor Process (PYP): Extending the Dirichlet Process with an additional parameter, the PYP models clustering with power-law behavior, which is suitable for datasets that exhibit such distributions, like those seen in language data.

Practical and Theoretical Implications

The paper dives into the implications of employing BNP methodologies, highlighting how they address some inherent challenges of deep learning:

  1. Uncertainty Quantification: BNP methods inherently quantify uncertainty through posterior distributions, which is critical for applications requiring high reliability, such as medical diagnosis and financial forecasting.
  2. Interpretability: Unlike deep learning models, which are often black-boxes, BNP models provide interpretable outputs through their probabilistic structure, enhancing transparency in decision-making processes.
  3. Data Efficiency and Scalability: BNP methods can effectively leverage smaller datasets by incorporating prior knowledge and adapting model complexity based on available data. Their ability to grow with data also ensures scalability.

Future Directions

The paper explores combining BNP and deep learning, proposing hybrid models that could leverage the strengths of both paradigms. Potential advancements include scalable BNP algorithms for large datasets and enhancing interpretability and robustness of deep learning models through BNP principles. Furthermore, challenges like adversarial robustness and learning from few shots can be addressed via BNP's flexible and interpretable frameworks.

Conclusion

Bayesian nonparametrics present a viable alternative or complementary approach to deep learning, especially in domains where model flexibility, uncertainty quantification, and data efficiency are paramount. While deep learning continues to dominate AI advancements, integrating BNP methods could lead to more versatile and resilient solutions, benefiting a wider range of applications and driving research into more nuanced AI models.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com