Log in

Uncertainty calibration for probabilistic projection methods

  • Published:
Statistics and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Classical Krylov subspace projection methods for the solution of linear problem \(Ax = b\) output an approximate solution \({\widetilde{x}}\simeq x\). Recently, it has been recognized that projection methods can be understood from a statistical perspective. These probabilistic projection methods return a distribution \(p({\widetilde{x}})\) in place of a point estimate \({\widetilde{x}}\). The resulting uncertainty, codified as a distribution, can, in theory, be meaningfully combined with other uncertainties, can be propagated through computational pipelines, and can be used in the framework of probabilistic decision theory. The problem we address is that the current probabilistic projection methods lead to the poorly calibrated posterior distribution. We improve the covariance matrix from previous works in a way that it does not contain such undesirable objects as \(A^{-1}\) or \(A^{-1}A^{-T}\), results in nontrivial uncertainty, and reproduces an arbitrary projection method as a mean of the posterior distribution. We also propose a variant that is numerically inexpensive in the case the uncertainty is calibrated a priori. Since it usually is not, we put forward a practical way to calibrate uncertainty that performs reasonably well, albeit at the expense of roughly doubling the numerical cost of the underlying projection method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://sparse.tamu.edu/MaxPlanck/shallow_water2.

  2. We do not consider “lucky breakdowns” (Saad 2003, Section 6.3.1)

  3. Note that the choice \(\alpha = \beta = 0\) leads to the improper prior. In the present case the posterior distribution is always proper, so noninformative prior seems harmless. Moreover, s is a scale parameter so \(p(s)\propto s^{-1}\) is a reasonable choice (see (Gelman et al. 2013), Sect. 2.8).

  4. This equation can be rearranged into an ordinary linear system \(Ax = b\), where A is a matrix with two indices, by the use of lexicographic order. We do not cover this here in details, consult https://github.com/VLSF/BayesKrylov for the implementation.

References

  • Bartels, S., Cockayne, J., Ipsen, I.C.F., Hennig, P.: Probabilistic linear solvers: a unifying view. Stat. Comput. 29(6), 1249–1263 (2019)

  • Bernardo, J.M., Smith, A.F.: Bayesian theory, vol. 405. Wiley, Newyork (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezanson, J., Edelman, A., Karpinski, S., Shah, V.B.: Julia: a fresh approach to numerical computing. SIAM Rev. 59(1), 65–98 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ciarlet, P. G. (2002). The finite element method for elliptic problems. SIAM

  • Cockayne, J., Oates, C.J., Ipsen, I.C.F., Girolami, M.: A Bayesian conjugate gradient method (with discussion). Bayesian Anal. 14(3), 937–1012 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., Dunson, D.B., Vehtari, A., Rubin, D.B.: Bayesian data analysis. CRC Press, USA (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hackbusch, W. (2016). Iterative solution of large sparse systems of equations, volume 95 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer, [Cham], second edition

  • Hennig, P.: Probabilistic interpretation of linear solvers. SIAM J. Optim. 25(1), 234–260 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hennig, P., Kiefel, M.: Quasi-Newton methods: a new direction. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 14, 843–865 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes, M.R., Stiefel, E., et al.: Methods of conjugate gradients for solving linear systems, vol. 49. NBS Washington, DC (1952)

  • Kennedy, M.C., O’Hagan, A.: Predicting the output from a complex computer code when fast approximations are available. Biometrika 87(1), 1–13 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamoorthy, K. (2016). Handbook of statistical distributions with applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, second edition

  • Lattimore, T., Szepesvári, C.: Bandit algorithms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2020)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peherstorfer, B., Willcox, K., Gunzburger, M.: Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization. Siam Review 60(3), 550–591 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pletcher, R.H., Tannehill, J.C., Anderson, D.: Computational fluid mechanics and heat transfer. CRC Press, USA (2012)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, T. W., Ipsen, I. C., Cockayne, J., and Oates, C. J. (2020). A probabilistic numerical extension of the conjugate gradient method. ar**v preprint ar**v:2008.03225

  • Saad, Y.: Iterative methods for sparse linear systems. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, second edition (2003)

  • Shahriari, B., Swersky, K., Wang, Z., Adams, R.P., De Freitas, N.: Taking the human out of the loop: A review of bayesian optimization. Proceedings of the IEEE 104(1), 148–175 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, C.H., Chan, T.F., Kuo, C.J.: Multilevel filtering preconditioners: Extensions to more general elliptic problems. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput. 13(1), 227–242 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Trefethen, L. N. and Bau, III, D.: Numerical linear algebra. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA (1997)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladimir Fanaskov.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fanaskov, V. Uncertainty calibration for probabilistic projection methods. Stat Comput 31, 56 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-021-10031-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-021-10031-9

Keywords

Navigation