Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes
The aim of this paper is to compare four different methods for binary classification with an underlying Gaussian process with respect to theoretical consistency and practical performance. Two of the inference schemes, namely classical indicator kriging and simplicial indicator kriging, are analytica...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment 2011-10, Vol.25 (7), p.865-879 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 879 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 865 |
container_title | Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment |
container_volume | 25 |
creator | Röder, Jens Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon Hamprecht, Fred A |
description | The aim of this paper is to compare four different methods for binary classification with an underlying Gaussian process with respect to theoretical consistency and practical performance. Two of the inference schemes, namely classical indicator kriging and simplicial indicator kriging, are analytically tractable and fast. However, these methods rely on simplifying assumptions which are inappropriate for categorical class labels. A consistent and previously described model extension involves a doubly stochastic process. There, the unknown posterior class probability f(·) is considered a realization of a spatially correlated Gaussian process that has been squashed to the unit interval, and a label at position x is considered an independent Bernoulli realization with success parameter f(x). Unfortunately, inference for this model is not known to be analytically tractable. In this paper, we propose two new computational schemes for the inference in this doubly stochastic model, namely the “Aitchison Maximum Posterior” and the “Doubly Stochastic Gaussian Quadrature”. Both methods are analytical up to a final step where optimization or integration must be carried out numerically. For the comparison of practical performance, the methods are applied to storm forecasts for the Spanish coast based on wave heights in the Mediterranean Sea. While the error rate of the doubly stochastic models is slightly lower, their computational cost is much higher. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_899143900</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2425712661</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-b2a85b567f710f641cd7e720a1663ea1968ca1e5878e3e502d467568926aa1a23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9r1UAUxYMoWGo_gCsHN7ow9t7Mf3dStAqFLtquh_smk9dIknnmJkq_vfOMKLjoau5cfudwD6eqXiK8RwB7zgDK2hoQa1De1fCkOkElTS0b7Z_-nRU8r86Y-13RaOk9wknVXdJaVjSJw5xjYhZxoLLo-khLn6cPgvtpPzyIH2nmlUWb11358ZLjPfHSRzHmNg38TtDUiin9FDGPh3X5LaZBcLxPY-IX1bOOBk5nf97T6u7zp9uLL_XV9eXXi49XdZTaLPWuIad32tjOInRGYWxtsg0QGiMToTcuEibtrEsyaWhaZaw2zjeGCKmRp9Wbzbek-b4mXsLYc0zDQFPKKwdXUivpAQr59lESrS03gPO6oK__Q7_ldS7pip-TSnnjsUC4QXHOzHPqwmHuR5ofAkI4thS2lkJpKRxbCscbmk3DhZ32af5n_Jjo1SbqKAfazz2Hu5sGUAOgl2Ct_AXen53b</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>883449691</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Röder, Jens ; Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon ; Hamprecht, Fred A</creator><creatorcontrib>Röder, Jens ; Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon ; Hamprecht, Fred A</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this paper is to compare four different methods for binary classification with an underlying Gaussian process with respect to theoretical consistency and practical performance. Two of the inference schemes, namely classical indicator kriging and simplicial indicator kriging, are analytically tractable and fast. However, these methods rely on simplifying assumptions which are inappropriate for categorical class labels. A consistent and previously described model extension involves a doubly stochastic process. There, the unknown posterior class probability f(·) is considered a realization of a spatially correlated Gaussian process that has been squashed to the unit interval, and a label at position x is considered an independent Bernoulli realization with success parameter f(x). Unfortunately, inference for this model is not known to be analytically tractable. In this paper, we propose two new computational schemes for the inference in this doubly stochastic model, namely the “Aitchison Maximum Posterior” and the “Doubly Stochastic Gaussian Quadrature”. Both methods are analytical up to a final step where optimization or integration must be carried out numerically. For the comparison of practical performance, the methods are applied to storm forecasts for the Spanish coast based on wave heights in the Mediterranean Sea. While the error rate of the doubly stochastic models is slightly lower, their computational cost is much higher.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1436-3240</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3259</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>analytical methods ; Aquatic Pollution ; Chemistry and Earth Sciences ; Classification ; coasts ; Computational Intelligence ; Computer Science ; Computers ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Environment ; Gaussian ; Indicators ; Inference ; Kriging ; Math. Appl. in Environmental Science ; Mathematical analysis ; Mathematical models ; Normal distribution ; Original Paper ; Physics ; probability ; Probability Theory and Stochastic Processes ; Statistics for Engineering ; Stochastic models ; Stochastic processes ; Stochasticity ; Waste Water Technology ; Water Management ; Water Pollution Control ; Wave height</subject><ispartof>Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment, 2011-10, Vol.25 (7), p.865-879</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-b2a85b567f710f641cd7e720a1663ea1968ca1e5878e3e502d467568926aa1a23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Röder, Jens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamprecht, Fred A</creatorcontrib><title>Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes</title><title>Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment</title><addtitle>Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess</addtitle><description>The aim of this paper is to compare four different methods for binary classification with an underlying Gaussian process with respect to theoretical consistency and practical performance. Two of the inference schemes, namely classical indicator kriging and simplicial indicator kriging, are analytically tractable and fast. However, these methods rely on simplifying assumptions which are inappropriate for categorical class labels. A consistent and previously described model extension involves a doubly stochastic process. There, the unknown posterior class probability f(·) is considered a realization of a spatially correlated Gaussian process that has been squashed to the unit interval, and a label at position x is considered an independent Bernoulli realization with success parameter f(x). Unfortunately, inference for this model is not known to be analytically tractable. In this paper, we propose two new computational schemes for the inference in this doubly stochastic model, namely the “Aitchison Maximum Posterior” and the “Doubly Stochastic Gaussian Quadrature”. Both methods are analytical up to a final step where optimization or integration must be carried out numerically. For the comparison of practical performance, the methods are applied to storm forecasts for the Spanish coast based on wave heights in the Mediterranean Sea. While the error rate of the doubly stochastic models is slightly lower, their computational cost is much higher.</description><subject>analytical methods</subject><subject>Aquatic Pollution</subject><subject>Chemistry and Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>coasts</subject><subject>Computational Intelligence</subject><subject>Computer Science</subject><subject>Computers</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Gaussian</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Inference</subject><subject>Kriging</subject><subject>Math. Appl. in Environmental Science</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Normal distribution</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Physics</subject><subject>probability</subject><subject>Probability Theory and Stochastic Processes</subject><subject>Statistics for Engineering</subject><subject>Stochastic models</subject><subject>Stochastic processes</subject><subject>Stochasticity</subject><subject>Waste Water Technology</subject><subject>Water Management</subject><subject>Water Pollution Control</subject><subject>Wave height</subject><issn>1436-3240</issn><issn>1436-3259</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9r1UAUxYMoWGo_gCsHN7ow9t7Mf3dStAqFLtquh_smk9dIknnmJkq_vfOMKLjoau5cfudwD6eqXiK8RwB7zgDK2hoQa1De1fCkOkElTS0b7Z_-nRU8r86Y-13RaOk9wknVXdJaVjSJw5xjYhZxoLLo-khLn6cPgvtpPzyIH2nmlUWb11358ZLjPfHSRzHmNg38TtDUiin9FDGPh3X5LaZBcLxPY-IX1bOOBk5nf97T6u7zp9uLL_XV9eXXi49XdZTaLPWuIad32tjOInRGYWxtsg0QGiMToTcuEibtrEsyaWhaZaw2zjeGCKmRp9Wbzbek-b4mXsLYc0zDQFPKKwdXUivpAQr59lESrS03gPO6oK__Q7_ldS7pip-TSnnjsUC4QXHOzHPqwmHuR5ofAkI4thS2lkJpKRxbCscbmk3DhZ32af5n_Jjo1SbqKAfazz2Hu5sGUAOgl2Ct_AXen53b</recordid><startdate>20111001</startdate><enddate>20111001</enddate><creator>Röder, Jens</creator><creator>Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon</creator><creator>Hamprecht, Fred A</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0W</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111001</creationdate><title>Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes</title><author>Röder, Jens ; Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon ; Hamprecht, Fred A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-b2a85b567f710f641cd7e720a1663ea1968ca1e5878e3e502d467568926aa1a23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>analytical methods</topic><topic>Aquatic Pollution</topic><topic>Chemistry and Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>coasts</topic><topic>Computational Intelligence</topic><topic>Computer Science</topic><topic>Computers</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Gaussian</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Inference</topic><topic>Kriging</topic><topic>Math. Appl. in Environmental Science</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Normal distribution</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Physics</topic><topic>probability</topic><topic>Probability Theory and Stochastic Processes</topic><topic>Statistics for Engineering</topic><topic>Stochastic models</topic><topic>Stochastic processes</topic><topic>Stochasticity</topic><topic>Waste Water Technology</topic><topic>Water Management</topic><topic>Water Pollution Control</topic><topic>Wave height</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Röder, Jens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamprecht, Fred A</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>DELNET Engineering & Technology Collection</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><jtitle>Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Röder, Jens</au><au>Tolosana-Delgado, Raimon</au><au>Hamprecht, Fred A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes</atitle><jtitle>Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment</jtitle><stitle>Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess</stitle><date>2011-10-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>865</spage><epage>879</epage><pages>865-879</pages><issn>1436-3240</issn><eissn>1436-3259</eissn><abstract>The aim of this paper is to compare four different methods for binary classification with an underlying Gaussian process with respect to theoretical consistency and practical performance. Two of the inference schemes, namely classical indicator kriging and simplicial indicator kriging, are analytically tractable and fast. However, these methods rely on simplifying assumptions which are inappropriate for categorical class labels. A consistent and previously described model extension involves a doubly stochastic process. There, the unknown posterior class probability f(·) is considered a realization of a spatially correlated Gaussian process that has been squashed to the unit interval, and a label at position x is considered an independent Bernoulli realization with success parameter f(x). Unfortunately, inference for this model is not known to be analytically tractable. In this paper, we propose two new computational schemes for the inference in this doubly stochastic model, namely the “Aitchison Maximum Posterior” and the “Doubly Stochastic Gaussian Quadrature”. Both methods are analytical up to a final step where optimization or integration must be carried out numerically. For the comparison of practical performance, the methods are applied to storm forecasts for the Spanish coast based on wave heights in the Mediterranean Sea. While the error rate of the doubly stochastic models is slightly lower, their computational cost is much higher.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1436-3240 |
ispartof | Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment, 2011-10, Vol.25 (7), p.865-879 |
issn | 1436-3240 1436-3259 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_899143900 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | analytical methods Aquatic Pollution Chemistry and Earth Sciences Classification coasts Computational Intelligence Computer Science Computers Earth and Environmental Science Earth Sciences Environment Gaussian Indicators Inference Kriging Math. Appl. in Environmental Science Mathematical analysis Mathematical models Normal distribution Original Paper Physics probability Probability Theory and Stochastic Processes Statistics for Engineering Stochastic models Stochastic processes Stochasticity Waste Water Technology Water Management Water Pollution Control Wave height |
title | Gaussian process classification: singly versus doubly stochastic models, and new computational schemes |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T15%3A17%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Gaussian%20process%20classification:%20singly%20versus%20doubly%20stochastic%20models,%20and%20new%20computational%20schemes&rft.jtitle=Stochastic%20environmental%20research%20and%20risk%20assessment&rft.au=R%C3%B6der,%20Jens&rft.date=2011-10-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=865&rft.epage=879&rft.pages=865-879&rft.issn=1436-3240&rft.eissn=1436-3259&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00477-011-0498-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2425712661%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=883449691&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |