4.7 Article

Cluster-Specific Predictions with Multi-Task Gaussian Processes

期刊

出版社

MICROTOME PUBL

关键词

Gaussian processes mixture; curve clustering; multi-task learning; variational EM; cluster-specific predictions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper introduces a model based on Gaussian processes (GPs) for simultaneously handling multitask learning, clustering, and prediction for multiple functional data. The model acts as a model-based clustering method for functional data and also serves as a learning step for subsequent predictions for new tasks. By considering uncertainty in both mean processes and latent clustering variables within a predictive distribution, the model improves performance when dealing with group-structured data.
A model involving Gaussian processes (GPs) is introduced to simultaneously handle multitask learning, clustering, and prediction for multiple functional data. This procedure acts as a model-based clustering method for functional data as well as a learning step for subsequent predictions for new tasks. The model is instantiated as a mixture of multi-task GPs with common mean processes. A variational EM algorithm is derived for dealing with the optimisation of the hyper-parameters along with the hyper-posteriors' estimation of latent variables and processes. We establish explicit formulas for integrating the mean processes and the latent clustering variables within a predictive distribution, accounting for uncertainty in both aspects. This distribution is defined as a mixture of cluster-specific GP predictions, which enhances the performance when dealing with group-structured data. The model handles irregular grids of observations and offers different hypotheses on the covariance structure for sharing additional information across tasks. The performances on both clustering and prediction tasks are assessed through various simulated scenarios and real data sets. The overall algorithm, called MAGMACLUST, is publicly available as an R package.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据