亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

We consider a model for multivariate data with heavy-tailed marginals and a Gaussian dependence structure. The marginal distributions are allowed to have non-homogeneous tail behavior which is in contrast to most popular modeling paradigms for multivariate heavy-tails. Estimation and analysis in such models have been limited due to the so-called asymptotic tail independence property of Gaussian copula rendering probabilities of many relevant extreme sets negligible. In this paper we obtain precise asymptotic expressions for these erstwhile negligible probabilities. We also provide consistent estimates of the marginal tail indices and the Gaussian correlation parameters, and, establish their joint asymptotic normality. The efficacy of our estimation methods are exhibited using extensive simulations as well as real data sets from online networks, insurance claims, and internet traffic.

Discovering causal relations from observational data is important. The existence of unobserved variables (e.g. latent confounding or mediation) can mislead the causal identification. To overcome this problem, proximal causal discovery methods attempted to adjust for the bias via the proxy of the unobserved variable. Particularly, hypothesis test-based methods proposed to identify the causal edge by testing the induced violation of linearity. However, these methods only apply to discrete data with strict level constraints, which limits their practice in the real world. In this paper, we fix this problem by extending the proximal hypothesis test to cases where the system consists of continuous variables. Our strategy is to present regularity conditions on the conditional distributions of the observed variables given the hidden factor, such that if we discretize its observed proxy with sufficiently fine, finite bins, the involved discretization error can be effectively controlled. Based on this, we can convert the problem of testing continuous causal relations to that of testing discrete causal relations in each bin, which can be effectively solved with existing methods. These non-parametric regularities we present are mild and can be satisfied by a wide range of structural causal models. Using both simulated and real-world data, we show the effectiveness of our method in recovering causal relations when unobserved variables exist.

It is often desirable to summarise a probability measure on a space $X$ in terms of a mode, or MAP estimator, i.e.\ a point of maximum probability. Such points can be rigorously defined using masses of metric balls in the small-radius limit. However, the theory is not entirely straightforward: the literature contains multiple notions of mode and various examples of pathological measures that have no mode in any sense. Since the masses of balls induce natural orderings on the points of $X$, this article aims to shed light on some of the problems in non-parametric MAP estimation by taking an order-theoretic perspective, which appears to be a new one in the inverse problems community. This point of view opens up attractive proof strategies based upon the Cantor and Kuratowski intersection theorems; it also reveals that many of the pathologies arise from the distinction between greatest and maximal elements of an order, and from the existence of incomparable elements of $X$, which we show can be dense in $X$, even for an absolutely continuous measure on $X = \mathbb{R}$.

Policy optimization methods with function approximation are widely used in multi-agent reinforcement learning. However, it remains elusive how to design such algorithms with statistical guarantees. Leveraging a multi-agent performance difference lemma that characterizes the landscape of multi-agent policy optimization, we find that the localized action value function serves as an ideal descent direction for each local policy. Motivated by the observation, we present a multi-agent PPO algorithm in which the local policy of each agent is updated similarly to vanilla PPO. We prove that with standard regularity conditions on the Markov game and problem-dependent quantities, our algorithm converges to the globally optimal policy at a sublinear rate. We extend our algorithm to the off-policy setting and introduce pessimism to policy evaluation, which aligns with experiments. To our knowledge, this is the first provably convergent multi-agent PPO algorithm in cooperative Markov games.

Combination of several anti-cancer treatments has typically been presumed to have enhanced drug activity. Motivated by a real clinical trial, this paper considers phase I-II dose finding designs for dual-agent combinations, where one main objective is to characterize both the toxicity and efficacy profiles. We propose a two-stage Bayesian adaptive design that accommodates a change of patient population in-between. In stage I, we estimate a maximum tolerated dose combination using the escalation with overdose control (EWOC) principle. This is followed by a stage II, conducted in a new yet relevant patient population, to find the most efficacious dose combination. We implement a robust Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model to allow sharing of information on the efficacy across stages, assuming that the related parameters are either exchangeable or nonexchangeable. Under the assumption of exchangeability, a random-effects distribution is specified for the main effects parameters to capture uncertainty about the between-stage differences. The inclusion of nonexchangeability assumption further enables that the stage-specific efficacy parameters have their own priors. The proposed methodology is assessed with an extensive simulation study. Our results suggest a general improvement of the operating characteristics for the efficacy assessment, under a conservative assumption about the exchangeability of the parameters \textit{a priori}

Many recent developments in causal inference, and functional estimation problems more generally, have been motivated by the fact that classical one-step (first-order) debiasing methods, or their more recent sample-split double machine-learning avatars, can outperform plugin estimators under surprisingly weak conditions. These first-order corrections improve on plugin estimators in a black-box fashion, and consequently are often used in conjunction with powerful off-the-shelf estimation methods. These first-order methods are however provably suboptimal in a minimax sense for functional estimation when the nuisance functions live in Holder-type function spaces. This suboptimality of first-order debiasing has motivated the development of "higher-order" debiasing methods. The resulting estimators are, in some cases, provably optimal over Holder-type spaces, but both the estimators which are minimax-optimal and their analyses are crucially tied to properties of the underlying function space. In this paper we investigate the fundamental limits of structure-agnostic functional estimation, where relatively weak conditions are placed on the underlying nuisance functions. We show that there is a strong sense in which existing first-order methods are optimal. We achieve this goal by providing a formalization of the problem of functional estimation with black-box nuisance function estimates, and deriving minimax lower bounds for this problem. Our results highlight some clear tradeoffs in functional estimation -- if we wish to remain agnostic to the underlying nuisance function spaces, impose only high-level rate conditions, and maintain compatibility with black-box nuisance estimators then first-order methods are optimal. When we have an understanding of the structure of the underlying nuisance functions then carefully constructed higher-order estimators can outperform first-order estimators.

Bayesian optimization is a class of global optimization techniques. In Bayesian optimization, the underlying objective function is modeled as a realization of a Gaussian process. Although the Gaussian process assumption implies a random distribution of the Bayesian optimization outputs, quantification of this uncertainty is rarely studied in the literature. In this work, we propose a novel approach to assess the output uncertainty of Bayesian optimization algorithms, which proceeds by constructing confidence regions of the maximum point (or value) of the objective function. These regions can be computed efficiently, and their confidence levels are guaranteed by the uniform error bounds for sequential Gaussian process regression newly developed in the present work. Our theory provides a unified uncertainty quantification framework for all existing sequential sampling policies and stopping criteria.

Optimization is a key tool for scientific and engineering applications, however, in the presence of models affected by uncertainty, the optimization formulation needs to be extended to consider statistics of the quantity of interest. Optimization under uncertainty (OUU) deals with this endeavor and requires uncertainty quantification analyses at several design locations. The cost of OUU is proportional to the cost of performing a forward uncertainty analysis at each design location visited, which makes the computational burden too high for high-fidelity simulations with significant computational cost. From a high-level standpoint, an OUU workflow typically has two main components: an inner loop strategy for the computation of statistics of the quantity of interest, and an outer loop optimization strategy tasked with finding the optimal design, given a merit function based on the inner loop statistics. In this work, we propose to alleviate the cost of the inner loop uncertainty analysis by leveraging the so-called Multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) method. MLMC has the potential of drastically reducing the computational cost by allocating resources over multiple models with varying accuracy and cost. The resource allocation problem in MLMC is formulated by minimizing the computational cost given a target variance for the estimator. We consider MLMC estimators for statistics usually employed in OUU workflows and solve the corresponding allocation problem. For the outer loop, we consider a derivative-free optimization strategy implemented in the SNOWPAC library; our novel strategy is implemented and released in the Dakota software toolkit. We discuss several numerical test cases to showcase the features and performance of our novel approach with respect to the single fidelity counterpart, based on standard Monte Carlo evaluation of statistics.

Causal discovery and causal reasoning are classically treated as separate and consecutive tasks: one first infers the causal graph, and then uses it to estimate causal effects of interventions. However, such a two-stage approach is uneconomical, especially in terms of actively collected interventional data, since the causal query of interest may not require a fully-specified causal model. From a Bayesian perspective, it is also unnatural, since a causal query (e.g., the causal graph or some causal effect) can be viewed as a latent quantity subject to posterior inference -- other unobserved quantities that are not of direct interest (e.g., the full causal model) ought to be marginalized out in this process and contribute to our epistemic uncertainty. In this work, we propose Active Bayesian Causal Inference (ABCI), a fully-Bayesian active learning framework for integrated causal discovery and reasoning, which jointly infers a posterior over causal models and queries of interest. In our approach to ABCI, we focus on the class of causally-sufficient, nonlinear additive noise models, which we model using Gaussian processes. We sequentially design experiments that are maximally informative about our target causal query, collect the corresponding interventional data, and update our beliefs to choose the next experiment. Through simulations, we demonstrate that our approach is more data-efficient than several baselines that only focus on learning the full causal graph. This allows us to accurately learn downstream causal queries from fewer samples while providing well-calibrated uncertainty estimates for the quantities of interest.

This paper focuses on the expected difference in borrower's repayment when there is a change in the lender's credit decisions. Classical estimators overlook the confounding effects and hence the estimation error can be magnificent. As such, we propose another approach to construct the estimators such that the error can be greatly reduced. The proposed estimators are shown to be unbiased, consistent, and robust through a combination of theoretical analysis and numerical testing. Moreover, we compare the power of estimating the causal quantities between the classical estimators and the proposed estimators. The comparison is tested across a wide range of models, including linear regression models, tree-based models, and neural network-based models, under different simulated datasets that exhibit different levels of causality, different degrees of nonlinearity, and different distributional properties. Most importantly, we apply our approaches to a large observational dataset provided by a global technology firm that operates in both the e-commerce and the lending business. We find that the relative reduction of estimation error is strikingly substantial if the causal effects are accounted for correctly.