Paper detail

Evidence bounds in singular models: probabilistic and variational perspectives

The marginal likelihood or evidence in Bayesian statistics contains an intrinsic penalty for larger model sizes and is a fundamental quantity in Bayesian model comparison. Over the past two decades, there has been steadily increasing activity to understand the nature of this penalty in singular statistical models, building on pioneering work by Sumio Watanabe. Unlike regular models where the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) encapsulates a first-order expansion of the logarithm of the marginal likelihood, parameter counting gets trickier in singular models where a quantity called the real log canonical threshold (RLCT) summarizes the effective model dimensionality. In this article, we offer a probabilistic treatment to recover non-asymptotic versions of established evidence bounds as well as prove a new result based on the Gibbs variational inequality. In particular, we show that mean-field variational inference correctly recovers the RLCT for any singular model in its canonical or normal form. We additionally exhibit sharpness of our bound by analyzing the dynamics of a general purpose coordinate ascent algorithm (CAVI) popularly employed in variational inference.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.