Automated Selection of Covariance Function for Gaussian Process Surrogate Models

0494113 - ÚI 2019 RIV DE eng C - Conference Paper (international conference)
Repický, Jakub - Pitra, Zbyněk - Holeňa, Martin
Automated Selection of Covariance Function for Gaussian Process Surrogate Models.
ITAT 2018: Information Technologies – Applications and Theory. Proceedings of the 18th conference ITAT 2018. Aachen: Technical University & CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2018 - (Krajči, S.), s. 64-71. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, V-2203. ISSN 1613-0073.
[ITAT 2018. Conference on Information Technologies – Applications and Theory /18./. Plejsy (SK), 21.09.2018-25.09.2018]
R&D Projects: GA ČR GA17-01251S
Grant - others:GA MŠk(CZ) LM2015042
Institutional support: RVO:67985807
Keywords : black-box optimization * Gaussian processes * information criteria * model selection
OECD category: Computer sciences, information science, bioinformathics (hardware development to be 2.2, social aspect to be 5.8)
http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2203/64.pdf

Gaussian processes have a long tradition in model-based algorithms for black-box optimization, where a limited number of objective function evaluations are available. A principal choice in specifying a Gaussian process model is the choice of the covariance function, which largely embodies the prior assumptions about the modeled function. Several methods for learning the form of covariance function have been proposed. We report a work in progress in which the covariance function is selected from a fixed set. The goal of covariance function selection is to capture non-local properties of the objective function and derive a more accurate surrogate model. The model-selection algorithm is evaluated in connection with Doubly Trained Surrogate Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolution Strategy on the Comparing Continuous Optimizers framework. Several estimates of predictive performance, including cross-validation and information criteria, are discussed. Focus is placed on information criteria suitable for nonparametric methods, and two of them are compared experimentally.
Permanent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11104/0287367