Deep adaptive design with an evidential bias criterion

Bayesian optimal experimental design (BOED) aims to collect informative data by optimizing an expected utility reflecting the goals of an experiment. However, this optimization is computationally challenging for common utilities and complex models. This is especially so for sequential or adaptive designs, where design and data collection alternate, so that feedback from already observed data must be taken into account. Most existing BOED research employs information gain as the utility, leading to the expected information gain (EIG) criterion. While EIG is widely useful, it may not always adequately reflect experimental goals. EIG can be viewed as rewarding experiments that produce large positive evidence for the truth on average, but it does not directly control the risk of an experiment producing misleading evidence. Here we consider an alternative criterion, which we call bias against (BA), that prioritizes such control. To address computational challenges when applying this criterion for adaptive design, we consider a policy-based deep adaptive design framework, which has previously been used for the EIG criterion. Minimizing a tractable upper bound on the BA objective is equivalent to maximizing a variance-penalized EIG criterion, and we optimize the latter by approximating it by Monte Carlo and learning design policies using stochastic gradient methods. The differences between BA and EIG designs are demonstrated in several examples including the adaptive design of a complex discrete choice experiment.

Bayesian Experimental Design via Score Matching

Policy-based approaches to Bayesian experimental design (BED) allow the learning of deep policy networks that adaptively make intelligent design decisions based on previously collected data. However, the training of such policies is often held back by a fundamental challenge: the double intractability of the expected information gain (EIG). This necessitates expensive or complex approximations that restrict the effort one can invest in optimising the policy itself. To address this, we show that the double intractability of the EIG can be isolated from the policy learning by first solving a score matching problem that is independent of the policy used, then using the learned score approximation to train the policy in a singly intractable manner. This turns the key multiplicative cost into an additive one and reduces the computational burden on the policy training itself, making it far cheaper to train the policy multiple times when needed, e.g. for architecture search, hyperparameter tuning, or avoiding local optima. In our experiments we train multiple competitive policies without inducing a multiplicative cost in likelihood evaluations, which can increase performance by allowing us to select the best policy even without performing hyperparameter or architecture searches.