/
Anytime  Anyspace  AND/OR Search for Bounding the Partition Function Anytime  Anyspace  AND/OR Search for Bounding the Partition Function

Anytime Anyspace AND/OR Search for Bounding the Partition Function - PowerPoint Presentation

debby-jeon
debby-jeon . @debby-jeon
Follow
347 views
Uploaded On 2018-09-22

Anytime Anyspace AND/OR Search for Bounding the Partition Function - PPT Presentation

Qi Lou Rina Dechter Alexander Ihler Feb 8 2017 1 Guideline Anytime bounds for the partition function of a graphical model Estimate bound the partition function as a heuristic search problem on ANDOR search trees ID: 675127

tree search memory heuristics search tree heuristics memory bound instances gap priority estimate solved partition node quality function anytime

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Anytime Anyspace AND/OR Search for Bou..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Anytime Anyspace AND/OR Search for Bounding the Partition Function

Qi Lou, Rina Dechter, Alexander IhlerFeb. 8, 2017

1Slide2

Guideline

Anytime bounds for the partition function of a graphical model.Estimate (bound) the partition function as a heuristic search problem on AND/OR search treesBest-first search using pre-compiled variational heuristics and carefully designed priorities.

Operate with limited-memory settings

2Slide3

Background

3Slide4

Graphical Models

A graphical model (X, D, F):

Bayesian

networks, Markov

random fields (MRF),

factor

graphs, etc.

Example model (MRF):

A

B

C

Primal Graph

4

A

B

f(A,B)

0

0

0.24

010.56101.2111.2

BCf(B,C)000.12010.36100.3111.7

…Slide5

Graphical Models

Typical QueriesMaximum A Posteriori (MAP) / Most Probable Explanation (MPE)The Partition Function

5Slide6

Bounding the Partition Function

Z 6

Deterministic methods

Elimination based (e.g., mini-bucket elimination

[

Dechter

and

Rish

2001

]

)

Variational approaches (e.g., tree-reweighted belief propagation [Wainwright et al. 2003]

)Search based (e.g., [Viricel et al. 2016])Monte

Carlo methodsImportance sampling based (e.g., [Liu et al. 2015,

Bidyuk and Dechter 2007]

)Approximate hash-based counting (e.g., [Chakraborty et al. 2016]

)Slide7

Algorithm

7Slide8

OR Search Tree

8

B

0

1

0

C

0

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1G01F01

G01G01E01F01G01G01

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

C

0

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

B

1

0

1

C

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

0

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

C

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

0

D

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

E

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

A

Solution path

: corresponds to a complete configuration of all variables

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

p

rimal graphSlide9

AND/OR Search Tree

[Nillson 1980

,

Dechter

and

Mateescu

2007]

OR

AND

OR

AND

OR

OR

AND

AND

9

A

B

B010101F0

1G01G01F01G01G01C01E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Solution tree

: corresponds to a complete configuration of all variables

p

rimal graph

A

B

C

F

G

D

E

p

seudo tree

[

Freuder

and Quinn 1985

]Slide10

Cost

10

A

B

B

0

1

0

1

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F01G01G01C01E01D01E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

Cost

g

(

n

)

:

Product

of

functions

fully instantiated

by the path from the root to node

n

.Slide11

Value and Heuristic

11

Value

v

(

n

)

:

M

ass of the subtree rooted at node

n

Heuristic

h

(

n): Estimate of

v(

n)

A

BB010101F

01G01G01F01G01G01C01E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

C

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

E

0

1

D

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1

F

0

1

G

0

1

G

0

1Slide12

Estimate

Z via Search on AND/OR Trees

15

A

B

C

F

G

D

E

p

seudo tree

A

0

1Slide13

Estimate

Z

via Search on AND/OR Trees

15

A

B

C

F

G

D

E

p

seudo tree

B

0

1

A

0

1Slide14

Key Issues

How to design high-quality heuristics?Quality of the estimate largely depends on the quality of heuristics14Slide15

λ

G (A,F)

15

Weighted Mini-Bucket (WMB) Heuristics

A

f(A,B)

B

f(B,C)

C

f(B,F)

F

f(A,G) f(F,G)

G

f(B,E) f(C,E)

E

λ

F

(A,B)

λB (A)λE (B,C)λD (B,C)λC (B)f(A)DDλD (A)f(B,D) f(C,D)f(A,D)…WMB heuristics are formed by messages from descendants.WMB heuristics are upper (or lower) bounds of the node value.WMB heuristics are monotonic.Resolving mini-buckets makes heuristics more (no less) accurate.[Liu and Ihler 2011]Slide16

Key Issues (revisited)

How to design high-quality heuristics?Quality of the estimate largely depends on the quality of heuristicsHow to design an effective search strategy?Our goal: quickly close the bound gap U - L

U

:= upper

bound of

Z

L

:= lower

bound of

Z

Equivalent: how to set priority for frontier nodes.

16Slide17

F

0

1

C

0

1

0

B

1

B

1

0

Intuition: expand the frontier node that potentially reduces the bound gap

U

- L

most

bounds the global

bound gap reduction

on

Z if the subtree beneath n is fully expanded.Priority17A01Strategy: Expand the frontier node with the largest priority value!

gap priorityupper prioritySlide18

Overcome the Memory Limit

Main strategy (SMA*-like [Russell 1992])Keep track of the lowest-priority node as wellWhen reach the memory limit, delete the lowest-priority nodes, and keep

expanding the

top-priority

ones

18Slide19

Experiment

19Slide20

AND/OR Best-first Search (AOBFS)

Variants of our algorithmA-G: AND/OR search tree with gap priorityA-U: AND/OR search tree with upper priorityO-G: OR search tree with gap priority [Henrion 1991]

20Slide21

Baselines

[Viricel et al. 2016] A recent depth-first branch-and-bound search algorithm that

provides deterministic upper

and

lower bounds on

Z.

For a given

ɛ

,

it

returns (non-anytime)

bounds on

lnZ whose gap is at most

ln(1+ɛ).

VEC [Dechter

1999, 2013] Variable Elimination with Conditioning, also known as custet-conditioning)

Apply variable elimination to each assignment of the cutset.MMAP-DFS [

Marinescu et al. 2014] (abbreviated M-D)A

state-of-the-art method for marginal MAP using AND/OR searchSolve the internal summation problem exactly using depth-first search aided by

WMB heuristics.21Slide22

Benchmarks

PIC’11: 23 instances selected by [Viricel et al. 2016] from the 2012 UAI competitionBN

: Bayesian networks from

the 2006

competition (50 randomly selected

instances)

Protein

:

made from the “small” protein side-chains of

[

Yanover

and Weiss 2002] (50 randomly selected

instances)CPD: computational protein design problems from

[Viricel et al. 2016] (100 randomly selected instances)

22Slide23

Parameters

Implementationall methods are implemented in C++ by the original authorsRuntime: 1 hourMemory:1GB, 4GB and

16GB

i

-bound determined by memory

23Slide24

Results

24

(a) PIC’11/queen5_5_4 (b)

Protein/1g6x

Anytime

behavior of AOBFSSlide25

Results

Number of instances solved to “tight” tolerance interval. The best (most solved) for each setting is

bolded

.

25Slide26

Results

Number of instances solved to “loose” tolerance interval. The best (most solved) for each setting is

bolded

.

26Slide27

Results

A-G sometimes effectively solve (<1e-3) instances with very high width given relatively few high-weight configurations of the model. “1who” is solved in 12 seconds and 1GB memory, while the corresponding junction tree requires about 150GB memory;

“2fcr”

is solved in 21 minutes and 16GB memory, while junction tree would require approximately 3.5PB.

27Slide28

Summary

Best-first search algorithm for bounding the partition functionBounds in an anytime fashion within limited memory resources.Search runs on AND/OR trees that enable exploiting conditional independencePriority-driven

best-first search scheme b

ased

on precompiled variational heuristics

Outperform state-of-the-art baselines on

multiple

benchmark &

memory

setups

28Slide29

Thank You!

Q&A29