-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: Heteroscedastic noise #113
Comments
Thanks @patel-zeel for raising this. Supporting heteroscedastic likelihood functions is certainly something I'd like to support. In theory, it should be quite straightforward to do by making the Gaussian likelihood function return a vector of noise terms, and not a scalar value - the current status. Unfortunately, I don't see myself being able to tend to this for at least another 6-8 weeks. However, I'd be very happy to support you in making a PR, if it's something you'd like to see in GPJax. |
Hi - I'm also very keen on being able to use a heteroscedastic noise model. Is there any update on this? Thanks :) |
Hi @matthewrhysjones, I am glad to know you are interested in this. @thomaspinder, and @daniel-dodd , I have some initial thoughts on how to go about this. Please let me know your thoughts:
I'd also love to know and discuss simpler and/or better methods that you may know/prefer to model heteroscedastic noise. |
Hi @patel-zeel and @matthewrhysjones Right now, it would be possible to simply use a I’ve not read the two papers that you are linked but I can take a look. More generally, I’d be very open to discussing a way to support heteroscedastic likelihoods as there are a range of alternative implementations (e.g., Lázardo-Gredilla & Titisias (2011) and Saul et. al., (2016).). It would be nice to have a flexible implementation that can easily accomodate some, if not all, of the aforementioned methods. Would either of you be keen to setting up a time where we can discuss what such a framework may look like? |
Happily @thomaspinder! Thank you for adding these papers; I'll take a look at them. Maybe It'll take me a day or two to go through them. My time zone is IST, so maybe if you could share something similar to doodle, we can find a common best time. We can also continue this discussion over GPJAX slack to avoid polluting the GitHub issue history and then later add a summary in this thread for future reference. |
There has been no recent activity on this issue. To keep our issues log clean, we remove old and inactive issues. |
There has been no activity on this PR for some time. Therefore, we will be automatically closing the PR if no new activity occurs within the next seven days. |
Feature Request
Describe the Feature Request
I think the current implementation does not support heteroscedastic noise variance.
https://github.com/thomaspinder/GPJax/blob/db40b9cb20103a5f7104b1ccd0ad12713f44bc06/gpjax/gps.py#L163
It can be tweaked with a few lines to support homoscedastic and heteroscedastic noise (if it does not break other checks and code).
Describe Preferred Solution
A generalized method of adding noise to the diagonal of the covariance matrix would solve the problem.
Related Code
If the feature request is approved, would you be willing to submit a PR?
Yes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: