Skip to content
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

Define imputation (predict_confidence) #271

Open
axch opened this issue Oct 22, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

Define imputation (predict_confidence) #271

axch opened this issue Oct 22, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@axch
Copy link
Contributor

axch commented Oct 22, 2015

  • Define it probabilistically
  • Implement the definition as an (approximate?) algorithm against joint simulation and assessment
  • Compare speed and quality against the structural implementation in crosscat
@fsaad
Copy link
Collaborator

fsaad commented Oct 22, 2015

Related probcomp/crosscat#54

@gregory-marton
Copy link
Contributor

@axch, please give more context?

@axch
Copy link
Contributor Author

axch commented Nov 19, 2015

We really do not have an operational probabilistic definition of imputation. I wrote a whole essay about it, currently at https://github.com/probcomp/bdb-experiments/commit/de246884daf3043486805c28a5ed05dacf2ecb18#diff-aeb232468aa592f22b8141343fda8001R913

@fsaad
Copy link
Collaborator

fsaad commented Nov 19, 2015

An upcoming project of mine is to revisit all these "define" issues, define them, then create generic implementations of BQL using Monte Carlo estimates obtained from the GPM simulate and logpdf.

@gregory-marton
Copy link
Contributor

Note that probcomp/crosscat#54 says

We are going to need to be loud about this.

and I agree. @raxraxraxraxrax , I wonder if we can improve caveats in our messaging around what bayeslite is, to try to expose and explain some of these issues?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants