probabilistic graphical modelsepxing/class/10708-09/lecture/lecture15-annotated.pdf1 © eric xing @...
TRANSCRIPT
1
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 1
School of Computer Science
Probabilistic Graphical Models
Complex Graphical ModelsComplex Graphical Models
Eric XingEric XingLecture 15, October 28, 2009
Reading:
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 2
Complex dynamic systems:Non-linearityNon-GaussianityMulti-modality...
Limitation of LDS
defines only linearly evolving, unimodal, and Gaussian belief statesA Kalman filter will predict the location of the bird using a single Gaussian centered on the obstacle. A more realistic model allows for the bird’s evasive action, predicting that it will fly to one side or the other.
The need for complex dynamic models
)x̂C(yˆˆ t|1t1t|| ++++++ −+= 1111 ttttt Kxx
tttttt ||| 1111 ++++ −= KCPPP
2
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 3
Representing complex dynamic processes
The problem with HMMsSuppose we want to track the state (e.g., the position) of D objects in an image sequence.Let each object be in K possible states.Then Xt= (Xt(1), … , Xt(D)) can have KD possible values.
⇒ Inference takes time and space.
⇒ P(Xt|Xt-1) need parameters to specify.
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 4
Dynamic Bayesian Network
A DBN represents the state of the world at time t using a set of random variables, Xt(1), … , Xt(D) (factored/ distributed representation).A DBN represents P(Xt|Xt-1) in a compact way using a parameterized graph.
⇒ A DBN may have exponentially fewer parameters than its corresponding HMM.⇒ Inference in a DBN may be exponentially faster than in the corresponding HMM.
3
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 5
DBNs are a kind of graphical model
In a graphical model, nodes represent random variables, and (lack of) arcs represents conditional independencies.
DBNs are Bayes nets for dynamic processes.
Informally, an arc from Xti to Xt+1jmeans Xi "causes" Xj.
Can "resolve" cycles in a "static" BN
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 6
A road map to complex dynamic models
AX
Y
AX
Y
AX
Ydiscrete
discrete
discrete
continuous
continuous
continuous
Mixture modele.g., mixture of multinomials
Mixture modele.g., mixture of Gaussians
Factor analysis
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
... A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
... A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
... A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
... A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
... A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
y2 y3y1 yN...
...
HMM (for discrete sequential data, e.g., text)
HMM(for continuous sequential data, e.g., speech signal)
State space model
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
Factorial HMM Switching SSM
4
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 7
HMM variants represented as DBNs
The same code (standard forward-backward, viterbi, and Baum-Welsh) can do inference and learning in all of these models.
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 8
Factorial HMMThe belief state at each time is
and in the most general case has a state space O(dk) for k d-nary chains
The common observed child Ytcouples all the parents (explaining away).
But the parameterization cost for fHMM is O(kd2) for k chain-specific transition models , rather than O(d2k) for
{ })()( ,, kttt QQX K1=
)|( )()( it
it QQp 1−
)|( 1−tt XXp
5
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 9
Factorial HMMs vs HMMsLet us compare a factorial HMM with D chains, each with K values, to its equivalent HMM.
Num. parameters to specifyHMM:
fHMM:
Computational complexity of exact inference:HMM
fHMM:
)|( 1−tt XXp
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 10
Triangulating fHMMIs the following triangulation correct?
Here is a triangulation
We have created cliques of size k+1, and there are O(kT) of them. The junction tree algorithm is not efficient for factorial HMMs.
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
⇒⇒??
6
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 11
Special case: switching HMM
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN...
... ... ... ...
A AA Ax2 x3x1 xN
yk2 yk3yk1 ykN...
...
y12 y13y11 y1N...
S2 S3S1 SN... The clipper
Person 1
Person k
The scene
Different chains have different state space and different semantics The exact calculation is intractable and we must use approximate inference methods
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 12
Hidden Markov decision trees
A combination of decision trees with factorial HMMsThis gives a "command structure" to the factorial representationAppropriate for multi-resolution time series Again, the exact calculation is intractable and we must use approximate inference methods
(Jordan,Ghahramani,&Saul,197)
7
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 13
Recall State Space Models (SSMs)
Also known as linear dynamical system, dynamic linear model, Kalman filter model, etc.
The Kalman lter can compute in O(min{M3;D2}) operations per time step.
)|( :tt YXP 1
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 14
Factored linear-Gaussian models produce sparse matrices
Directed arc from Xt-1i to Xtj iff A(i,j) >0(undirected arc between Xti to Xtj iff Σ−1(i,j) >0
e.g., consider a 2-chain factorial SSM with
),;()|( iit
iit
it
it QXAXXXP 11 −− =N
=−− ),|,( 21
11
21tttt XXXXP
8
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 15
Discrete-state modelsFactored discrete-state models do NOT produce sparsetransition matrices
e.g., consider a 2-chain factorial HMM
)|()|(),|,( 21
211
121
11
21−−−− = tttttttt XXPXXPXXXXP
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 16
Problems with SSMslinearityGaussianityUni-modality
9
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 17
Switching SMMPossible world:
multiple motion state:
Task: Trajectory prediction
Model:Combination of HMM and SSM
Belief state has O(kt) Gaussian modes:
),()|(),;()|(
),;(),|(
jiMiSjSpxtxXyYp
xxiSxXxXp
tt
tttttt
ititttttt
===
===
====
−
−−−
1
111
RCQA
NN
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 18
Data association (correspondence problem)
Optimal belief state has O(kt) modes.Common to use nearest neighbor approximation.For each time slice, can enforce that at most one source causes each observationCorrespondence problem also arises in shape matching and stereo vision.
10
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 19
Kinds of inference for DBNs
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 20
Complexity of inference in DBNEven with local connectivity, everything becomes correlated due to shared common influences in the past.E.g. coupled HMM (cHMM)
Even though CHMMs are sparse, all nodes eventually become correlated, so P(Xt|y1:t) has size O(2N).
11
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 21
Junction tree for coupled HMMsCliques form a frontier that snakes from Xt−1 to Xt.
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 22
Approximate FilteringMany possible representations for belief state :
Discrete distribution (histogram)GaussianMixture of GaussiansSet of samples (particles)
)|( :ttt YXP 1≡α
12
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 23
Belief state = discrete distributionDiscrete distribution is non-parametric (flexible), but intractable.Only consider k most probable values --- Beam search.Approximate joint as product of factors (ADF/BK approximation)
∏=
=≈C
it
ittt YXP
11 )|(~:αα
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 24
Example: Assumed density filtering (ADF)
ADF forces the belief state to live in some restricted family F, e.g., product of histograms, Gaussian.Given a prior , do one step of exact Bayesian updating to get . Then do a projection step to find the closest approximation in the family:
The Boyen-Koller (BK) algorithm is ADF applied to a DBNe.g., let F be a product of (singleton) marginals:
This is also a variational method, and the updating step can still be intractable
F∈−1tα~
F∉tα̂
)||(KLminarg~ qtqt αα )F∈
∈
13
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 25
Approximate smoothing (off-line)Two-lter smoothingLoopy belief propagationVariational methodsGibbs samplingCan combine exact and approximate methodsUsed as a subroutine for learning
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 26
NLP and Data MiningWe want:
Semantic-based search infer topics and categorize documentsMultimedia inferenceAutomatic translation Predict how topics evolve…
Researchtopics
1900 2000
Researchtopics
1900 2000
14
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 27
The Vector Space ModelRepresent each document by a high-dimensional vector in the space of words
⇒⇒
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 28
* *
T (m x k)
Λ(k x k)
DT
(k x n)
=
X (m x n)
Document
Term ...
∑=
=K
kkkk Tdw
1
rr λ
Latent Semantic Indexing
LSA does not define a properly normalized probability distribution of observed and latent entities
Does not support probabilistic reasoning under uncertainty and data fusion
15
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 29
Latent Semantic Structure
Latent Structure
Words
∑=l
l),()( ww PPl
w
Distribution over words
)w()()|w()w|(
PPPP ll
l =
Inferring latent structure
...)w|( 1 =+nwPPrediction
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 30
Objects are bags of elements
Mixtures are distributions over elements
Objects have mixing vector θRepresents each mixtures’ contributions
Object is generated as follows:Pick a mixture component from θPick an element from that component
Admixture Models
money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 money1 stream2 bank1 money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 bank1 money1 stream2
money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 money1 stream2 bank1 money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 bank1 money1 stream2
money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 money1 stream2 bank1 money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 bank1 money1 stream2
…
0.1 0.1 0.5…..
0.1 0.5 0.1…..
0.5 0.1 0.1…..
money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 money1 stream2 bank1 money1 bank1 bank1 loan1 river2 stream2 bank1 money1 river2 bank1 money1 bank1 loan1 bank1 money1 stream2
16
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 31
How to Model Semantic?Q: What is it about?A: Mainly MT, with syntax, some learning
A Hierarchical Phrase-Based Model for Statistical Machine Translation
We present a statistical phrase-based Translation model that uses hierarchical phrases—phrases that contain sub-phrases. The model is formally a synchronous context-free grammar but is learned from a bitext without any syntactic information. Thus it can be seen as a shift to the formal machinery of syntaxbased translation systems without any linguistic commitment. In our experimentsusing BLEU as a metric, the hierarchical
Phrase based model achieves a relative Improvement of 7.5% over Pharaoh, a state-of-the-art phrase-based system.
SourceTargetSMT
AlignmentScoreBLEU
ParseTreeNoun
PhraseGrammar
CFG
likelihoodEM
HiddenParametersEstimation
argMax
MT Syntax Learning
0.6 0.3 0.1
Unigram over vocabularyTo
pics
Mixing Proportion
Topic Models
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 32
Topic Models =Admixture ModelsGenerating a document
Prior
θ
z
w βNd
N
K
( ){ } ( )
from ,| Draw -
from Draw- each wordFor
prior thefrom
:1 nzknn
n
lmultinomiazwlmultinomiaz
nDraw
ββθ
θ−
Which prior to use?
17
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 33
Choice of Prior
Dirichlet (LDA) (Blei et al. 2003)Conjugate prior means efficient inference
Can only capture variations in each topic’s intensity independently
Logistic Normal (CTM=LoNTAM) (Blei & Lafferty 2005, Ahmed & Xing 2006)
Capture the intuition that some topics are highly correlated and can rise up in intensity togetherNot a conjugate prior implies hard inference
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 34
Logistic Normal Vs. Dirichlet
Dirichlet
18
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 35
Logistic Normal Vs. Dirichlet
Logistic
Normal
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 36
Mixed Membership Model (M3)Mixture versus admixture
⇒⇒
A Bayesian mixture model A Bayesian admixture model: Mixed membership model
19
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 37
Latent Dirichlet Allocation: M3 in text mining
A document is a bag of words each generated from a randomly selected topic
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 38
Population admixture: M3 in genetics
The genetic materials of each modern individual are inherited from multiple ancestral populations, each DNA locus may have a different generic origin …
Ancestral labels may have (e.g., Markovian) dependencies
20
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 39
Inference in Mixed Membership Models
Mixture versus admixture
Inference is very hard in M3, all hidden variables are coupled and not factorizable!
∑ ∏ ∏∫ ∫ ⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛=
}{,,
,
)|()|()|()|()(mn
nz
Nn
nm
nmnzmn dddGppzpxpDp φππφαππφ LL 1
⇒⇒
∑ ∫ ∏ ∏ −⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛
}{,,
,
)|()|()|()|(~)|(mn
nz
in
nm
nmnzmnn ddGppzpxpDp φπφαππφπ
© Eric Xing @ CMU, 2005-2009 40
Approaches to inferenceExact inference algorithms
The elimination algorithmThe junction tree algorithms
Approximate inference techniques
Monte Carlo algorithms:Stochastic simulation / sampling methodsMarkov chain Monte Carlo methods
Variational algorithms: Belief propagationVariational inference