SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2206.06991

Concentration of discrepancy-based approximate Bayesian computation via Rademacher complexity

Abstract

There has been increasing interest on summary-free solutions for approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) which replace distances among summaries with discrepancies between the empirical distributions of the observed data and the synthetic samples generated under the proposed parameter values. The success of these strategies has motivated theoretical studies on the limiting properties of the induced posteriors. However, there is still the lack of a theoretical framework for summary-free ABC that (i) is unified, instead of discrepancy-specific, (ii) does not require to constrain the analysis to data generating processes and statistical models meeting specific regularity conditions, but rather facilitates the derivation of limiting properties that hold uniformly, and (iii) relies on verifiable assumptions that provide explicit concentration bounds clarifying which factors govern the limiting behavior of the ABC posterior. We address this gap via a novel theoretical framework that introduces the concept of Rademacher complexity in the analysis of the limiting properties for discrepancy-based ABC posteriors, including in non-i.i.d. and misspecified settings. This yields a unified theory that relies on constructive arguments and provides more informative asymptotic results and uniform concentration bounds, even in settings not covered by current studies. These advancements are obtained by relating the asymptotic properties of summary-free ABC posteriors to the behavior of the Rademacher complexity associated with the chosen discrepancy in the family of integral probability semimetrics (IPS). The IPS class extends summary-based distances, and includes the Wasserstein distance and maximum mean discrepancy, among others. As clarified in specialized theoretical analyses of popular IPS discrepancies and via illustrative simulations, this perspective improves the understanding of summary-free ABC.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sirio Legramanti, Daniele Durante, Pierre Alquier. 2022-06-14. Concentration of discrepancy-based approximate Bayesian computation via Rademacher complexity. https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.06991

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