SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1806.02304

Variable Selection with ABC Bayesian Forests

Abstract

Few problems in statistics are as perplexing as variable selection in the presence of very many redundant covariates. The variable selection problem is most familiar in parametric environments such as the linear model or additive variants thereof. In this work, we abandon the linear model framework, which can be quite detrimental when the covariates impact the outcome in a non-linear way, and turn to tree-based methods for variable selection. Such variable screening is traditionally done by pruning down large trees or by ranking variables based on some importance measure. Despite heavily used in practice, these ad-hoc selection rules are not yet well understood from a theoretical point of view. In this work, we devise a Bayesian tree-based probabilistic method and show that it is consistent for variable selection when the regression surface is a smooth mix of $p>n$ covariates. These results are the first model selection consistency results for Bayesian forest priors. Probabilistic assessment of variable importance is made feasible by a spike-and-slab wrapper around sum-of-trees priors. Sampling from posterior distributions over trees is inherently very difficult. As an alternative to MCMC, we propose ABC Bayesian Forests, a new ABC sampling method based on data-splitting that achieves higher ABC acceptance rate. We show that the method is robust and successful at finding variables with high marginal inclusion probabilities. Our ABC algorithm provides a new avenue towards approximating the median probability model in non-parametric setups where the marginal likelihood is intractable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yi Liu, Veronika Ročková, Yuexi Wang. 2018-06-06. Variable Selection with ABC Bayesian Forests. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssb.12423

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME