跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确将常见因果模型和时间序列模型列为局部几何导致模型选择困难的对象。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Robin J. Evans

模型选择与局部几何

研究问题
不同模型在交点附近拥有相同切空间时,为何难以区分,它如何影响局部检验功效、凸化可能性及模型学习方法?
方法与思路
作者用切空间和切锥分析相交模型的局部可区分性及重参数化限制,并提出直接学习切空间的方法和贝叶斯网络学习算法。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,部分模型需要比常规根号样本量尺度更大的局部差异才能保持功效,并给出不能同时凸化的条件和模型选择思路。
阅读关注点
应核对切空间相同的具体模型、非标准局部备择速率的条件、切锥限制与凸化结论,以及贝叶斯网络算法的适用范围。
阅读边界
仅据版本未注明的索引摘要;结论针对所述局部几何条件,不能据此断言所有因果或时间序列模型均难辨别或不可凸化。

原文摘要

We consider problems in model selection caused by the geometry of models close to their points of intersection. In some cases—including common classes of causal or graphical models, as well as time series models—distinct models may nevertheless have identical tangent spaces. This has two immediate consequences: first, in order to obtain constant power to reject one model in favour of another we need local alternative hypotheses that decrease to the null at a slower rate than the usual parametric $n^{-1/2}$ (typically we will require $n^{-1/4}$ or slower); in other words, to distinguish between the models we need large effect sizes or very large sample sizes. Second, we show that under even weaker conditions on their tangent cones, models in these classes cannot be made simultaneously convex by a reparameterization. This shows that Bayesian network models, amongst others, cannot be learned directly with a convex method similar to the graphical lasso. However, we are able to use our results to suggest methods for model selection that learn the tangent space directly, rather than the model itself. In particular, we give a generic algorithm for learning Bayesian network models.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文