Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Radial Bayesian Neural Networks: Beyond Discrete Support In Large-Scale Bayesian Deep Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1907.00865 v4 pith:WP623CUQ submitted 2019-07-01 stat.ML cs.LG

Radial Bayesian Neural Networks: Beyond Discrete Support In Large-Scale Bayesian Deep Learning

classification stat.ML cs.LG
keywords radialbnnsbayesiansupportdiscretedeeplearningmethods
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose Radial Bayesian Neural Networks (BNNs): a variational approximate posterior for BNNs which scales well to large models while maintaining a distribution over weight-space with full support. Other scalable Bayesian deep learning methods, like MC dropout or deep ensembles, have discrete support-they assign zero probability to almost all of the weight-space. Unlike these discrete support methods, Radial BNNs' full support makes them suitable for use as a prior for sequential inference. In addition, they solve the conceptual challenges with the a priori implausibility of weight distributions with discrete support. The Radial BNN is motivated by avoiding a sampling problem in 'mean-field' variational inference (MFVI) caused by the so-called 'soap-bubble' pathology of multivariate Gaussians. We show that, unlike MFVI, Radial BNNs are robust to hyperparameters and can be efficiently applied to a challenging real-world medical application without needing ad-hoc tweaks and intensive tuning. In fact, in this setting Radial BNNs out-perform discrete-support methods like MC dropout. Lastly, by using Radial BNNs as a theoretically principled, robust alternative to MFVI we make significant strides in a Bayesian continual learning evaluation.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.