mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

The case for fully Bayesian optimisation in small-sample trials

arXiv 2208.13960 ↗First posted 30 Aug 2022cs.LG stat.MLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

While sample efficiency is the main motive for use of Bayesian optimisation when black-box functions are expensive to evaluate, the standard approach based on type II maximum likelihood (ML-II) may fail and result in disappointing performance in small-sample trials. The paper provides three compelling reasons to adopt fully Bayesian optimisation (FBO) as an alternative. First, failures of ML-II are more commonplace than implied by the existing studies using the contrived settings. Second, FBO is more robust than ML-II, and the price of robustness is almost trivial. Third, FBO has become simple to implement and fast enough to be practical. The paper supports the argument using relevant experiments, which reflect the current practice regarding models, algorithms, and software platforms. Since the benefits seem to outweigh the costs, researchers should consider adopting FBO for their applications so that they can guard against potential failures that end up wasting precious research resources.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2022.

Builds on

7 of 31 references.

References · 7

  1. 2018Pyro: Deep Universal Probabilistic Programmingcited by 380
  2. 2014Predictive Entropy Search for Efficient Global Optimization of Black-box Functionscited by 204
  3. 2021High-Dimensional Bayesian Optimization with Sparse Axis-Aligned Subspacescited by 141
  4. 2018A survey on policy search algorithms for learning robot controllers in a handful of trialscited by 35
  5. 2014Theoretical Analysis of Bayesian Optimisation with Unknown Gaussian Process Hyper-Parameterscited by 31
  6. 2019Approximate Inference for Fully Bayesian Gaussian Process Regressioncited by 31
  7. 2021How Bayesian Should Bayesian Optimisation Be?cited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.