REVIEW 1 cited by
Do Bayesian Neural Networks Need To Be Fully Stochastic?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
We investigate the benefit of treating all the parameters in a Bayesian neural network stochastically and find compelling theoretical and empirical evidence that this standard construction may be unnecessary. To this end, we prove that expressive predictive distributions require only small amounts of stochasticity. In particular, partially stochastic networks with only $n$ stochastic biases are universal probabilistic predictors for $n$-dimensional predictive problems. In empirical investigations, we find no systematic benefit of full stochasticity across four different inference modalities and eight datasets; partially stochastic networks can match and sometimes even outperform fully stochastic networks, despite their reduced memory costs.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Active and transfer learning with partially Bayesian neural networks for materials and chemicals
Partially Bayesian neural networks with only the first hidden and output layers probabilistic match fully Bayesian networks on active learning benchmarks while cutting compute by about four times.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.