Beliefs Beyond Posteriors: The Predictive Cost of ELBO Binding
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Posterior-seeking training need not produce the best predictive distribution in its family under model misspecification. For a last-layer weight belief, we locate the restriction responsible for this gap and quantify its cost. At the last layer the negative ELBO decomposes exactly into the belief's predictive log scores, the prior KL, and a binding: a sum of per-observation Jensen gaps that constrains predictive dispersion through posterior covariance. Removing the binding gives the established KL-regularised form of predictive-score training; a parameterisation-dependent factor-normaliser form performs similarly at the last layer. At fixed predictive mean, the leading restricted direction is the variance at each input, and its local value is the classical variance-component score evaluated at the plug-in predictor. This yields both a diagnostic and a price: in the flat-leverage limit, the Gaussian cost is the Jensen gap of a representable residual-variance profile, whereas a likelihood without a dispersion parameter pays the full expressible improvement over the plug-in. Controlled experiments find typically tenths of a nat for Gaussian regression but units to tens of nats for overdispersed Poisson counts. In an exploratory, prospectively specified validation on 28 count sets, 27 unused elsewhere, a screen computed from the point-prediction head alone agreed with the measured outcome on 24 of 25 decided sets (an always-open rule: 18), and its price proxy, once fixed, was within a factor of three of the predictive-score gain of the fitted free profile on all 10 open sets tested afterwards. Score training changes the inferential target: it yields classical per-input overdispersed heads whose covariance represents residual dispersion, not posterior or epistemic uncertainty.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.
Builds on
25 of 56 references.
References · 25
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
- 2016Variational Inference: A Review for Statisticianscited by 1,472
- 2015Weight Uncertainty in Neural Networkscited by 554
- 2020Simple and Principled Uncertainty Estimation with Deterministic Deep Learning via Distance Awarenesscited by 389
- 2013Gaussian Processes for Big Datacited by 383
- 2021Laplace Redux -- Effortless Bayesian Deep Learningcited by 365
- 2015Probabilistic Backpropagation for Scalable Learning of Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 295
- 2015Scalable Bayesian Optimization Using Deep Neural Networkscited by 284
- 2020Being Bayesian, Even Just a Bit, Fixes Overconfidence in ReLU Networkscited by 231
- 2013A General Framework for Updating Belief Distributionscited by 175
- 2013Expectation Propagation for approximate Bayesian inferencecited by 174
13 more
- 2021On Feature Collapse and Deep Kernel Learning for Single Forward Pass Uncertaintycited by 87
- 2024Variational Bayesian Last Layerscited by 69
- 2016Understanding Probabilistic Sparse Gaussian Process Approximationscited by 68
- 2015Black-box α-divergence Minimizationcited by 37
- 2019On the marginal likelihood and cross-validationcited by 37
- 2022Faithful Heteroscedastic Regression with Neural Networkscited by 37
- 2019Benchmarking the Neural Linear Model for Regressioncited by 31
- 2017Dropout Inference in Bayesian Neural Networks with Alpha-divergencescited by 28
- 2020Deep Sigma Point Processescited by 17
- 2020PACm-Bayes: Narrowing the Empirical Risk Gap in the Misspecified Bayesian Regimecited by 15
- 2020Direct loss minimization algorithms for sparse Gaussian processescited by 10
- 2026Richer Bayesian Last Layers with Subsampled NTK Featurescited by 4
- 2024Fully Heteroscedastic Count Regression with Deep Double Poisson Networkscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.