BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Manfred Jaeger

Manfred Jaeger contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

A Complete Characterization of Projectivity for Statistical Relational Models

A generative probabilistic model for relational data consists of a family of probability distributions for relational structures over domains of different sizes. In most existing statistical relational learning (SRL) frameworks, these models are not projective in the sense that the marginal of the distribution for size-$n$ structures on induced sub-structures of size $k<n$ is equal to the given distribution for size-$k$ structures. Projectivity is very beneficial in that it directly enables lifted inference and statistically consistent learning from sub-sampled relational structures. In earlier work some simple fragments of SRL languages have been identified that represent projective models. However, no complete characterization of, and representation framework for projective models has been given. In this paper we fill this gap: exploiting representation theorems for infinite exchangeable arrays we introduce a class of directed graphical latent variable models that precisely correspond to the class of projective relational models. As a by-product we also obtain a characterization for when a given distribution over size-$k$ structures is the statistical frequency distribution of size-$k$ sub-structures in much larger size-$n$ structures. These results shed new light onto the old open problem of how to apply Halpern et al.&#39;s &#34;random worlds approach&#34; for probabilistic inference to general relational signatures.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Approximating Euclidean by Imprecise Markov Decision Processes

Euclidean Markov decision processes are a powerful tool for modeling control problems under uncertainty over continuous domains. Finite state imprecise, Markov decision processes can be used to approximate the behavior of these infinite models. In this paper we address two questions: first, we investigate what kind of approximation guarantees are obtained when the Euclidean process is approximated by finite state approximations induced by increasingly fine partitions of the continuous state space. We show that for cost functions over finite time horizons the approximations become arbitrarily precise. Second, we use imprecise Markov decision process approximations as a tool to analyse and validate cost functions and strategies obtained by reinforcement learning. We find that, on the one hand, our new theoretical results validate basic design choices of a previously proposed reinforcement learning approach. On the other hand, the imprecise Markov decision process approximations reveal some inaccuracies in the learned cost functions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Lower Complexity Bounds for Lifted Inference

One of the big challenges in the development of probabilistic relational (or probabilistic logical) modeling and learning frameworks is the design of inference techniques that operate on the level of the abstract model representation language, rather than on the level of ground, propositional instances of the model. Numerous approaches for such &#34;lifted inference&#34; techniques have been proposed. While it has been demonstrated that these techniques will lead to significantly more efficient inference on some specific models, there are only very recent and still quite restricted results that show the feasibility of lifted inference on certain syntactically defined classes of models. Lower complexity bounds that imply some limitations for the feasibility of lifted inference on more expressive model classes were established early on in (Jaeger 2000). However, it is not immediate that these results also apply to the type of modeling languages that currently receive the most attention, i.e., weighted, quantifier-free formulas. In this paper we extend these earlier results, and show that under the assumption that NETIME =/= ETIME, there is no polynomial lifted inference algorithm for knowledge bases of weighted, quantifier- and function-free formulas. Further strengthening earlier results, this is also shown to hold for approximate inference, and for knowledge bases not containing the equality predicate.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access