Quantifying the mini-batching error in Bayesian inference for Adaptive Langevin dynamics
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Bayesian inference allows to obtain useful information on the parameters of models, either in computational statistics or more recently in the context of Bayesian Neural Networks. The computational cost of usual Monte Carlo methods for sampling posterior laws in Bayesian inference scales linearly with the number of data points. One option to reduce it to a fraction of this cost is to resort to mini-batching in conjunction with unadjusted discretizations of Langevin dynamics, in which case only a random fraction of the data is used to estimate the gradient. However, this leads to an additional noise in the dynamics and hence a bias on the invariant measure which is sampled by the Markov chain. We advocate using the so-called Adaptive Langevin dynamics, which is a modification of standard inertial Langevin dynamics with a dynamical friction which automatically corrects for the increased noise arising from mini-batching. We investigate the practical relevance of the assumptions underpinning Adaptive Langevin (constant covariance for the estimation of the gradient, Gaussian minibatching noise), which are not satisfied in typical models of Bayesian inference, and quantify the bias induced by minibatching in this case. We also suggest a possible extension of AdL to further reduce the bias on the posterior distribution, by considering a dynamical friction depending on the current value of the parameter to sample.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 76 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2021.
Builds on
18 of 76 references.
References · 18
- 2014Stochastic Gradient Hamiltonian Monte Carlocited by 341
- 2021What Are Bayesian Neural Network Posteriors Really Like?cited by 307
- 2017Stochastic gradient descent performs variational inference, converges to limit cycles for deep networkscited by 108
- 2017Bridging the Gap between Constant Step Size Stochastic Gradient Descent and Markov Chainscited by 84
- 2018Sampling Can Be Faster Than Optimizationcited by 68
- 2014Consistency and fluctuations for stochastic gradient Langevin dynamicscited by 65
- 2018On sampling from a log-concave density using kinetic Langevin diffusionscited by 61
- 2018The promises and pitfalls of Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamicscited by 56
- 2019High-Order Langevin Diffusion Yields an Accelerated MCMC Algorithmcited by 36
- 2017Control Variates for Stochastic Gradient MCMCcited by 25
- 2013Austerity in MCMC Land: Cutting the Metropolis-Hastings Budgetcited by 24
- 2020Decentralized Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics and Hamiltonian Monte Carlocited by 19
6 more
- 2014Speeding Up MCMC by Efficient Data Subsamplingcited by 18
- 2017The True Cost of Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamicscited by 11
- 2015Covariance-Controlled Adaptive Langevin Thermostat for Large-Scale Bayesian Samplingcited by 10
- 2019Partitioned integrators for thermodynamic parameterization of neural networkscited by 9
- 2016Stochastic Bouncy Particle Samplercited by 4
- 2018Langevin Markov Chain Monte Carlo with stochastic gradientscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.