Posterior and Computational Uncertainty in Gaussian Processes
Jonathan Wenger, Geoff Pleiss, Marvin Pförtner, Philipp Hennig, John P. Cunningham
Abstract
Gaussian processes scale prohibitively with the size of the dataset. In response, many approximation methods have been developed, which inevitably introduce approximation error. This additional source of uncertainty, due to limited computation, is entirely ignored when using the approximate posterior. Therefore in practice, GP models are often as much about the approximation method as they are about the data. Here, we develop a new class of methods that provides consistent estimation of the combined uncertainty arising from both the finite number of data observed and the finite amount of computation expended. The most common GP approximations map to an instance in this class, such as methods based on the Cholesky factorization, conjugate gradients, and inducing points. For any method in this class, we prove (i) convergence of its posterior mean in the associated RKHS, (ii) decomposability of its combined posterior covariance into mathematical and computational covariances, and (iii) that the combined variance is a tight worst-case bound for the squared error between the method's posterior mean and the latent function. Finally, we empirically demonstrate the consequences of ignoring computational uncertainty and show how implicitly modeling it improves generalization performance on benchmark datasets. 36th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2022).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext c006b2b5-916c-4512-94f8-e79e294f02c8Cited by top-tier papers3
- Computation-Aware Gaussian Processes: Model Selection And Linear-Time InferenceJonathan Wenger, Kaiwen Wu, Philipp Hennig, Jacob R. Gardner et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 15 citations
- Robust and Computation-Aware Gaussian ProcessesMarshal Arijona Sinaga, Julien Martinelli, Samuel KaskiNeurIPS 2025 · 1 citation
- PolicyGuard: Towards Test-time and Step-level Adversary Defense for Reinforcement Learning AgentJunfeng Guo, Heng HuangICML 2026
Builds on5
- Efficiently sampling functions from Gaussian process posteriorsJames T. Wilson, Viacheslav Borovitskiy, Alexander Terenin, Peter Mostowsky et al.ICML 2020 · 186 citations
- Preconditioning for Scalable Gaussian Process Hyperparameter OptimizationJonathan Wenger, Geoff Pleiss, Philipp Hennig, John P. Cunningham et al.ICML 2022 · 36 citations
- Tighter Bounds on the Log Marginal Likelihood of Gaussian Process Regression Using Conjugate GradientsArtem Artemev, David R. Burt, Mark van der WilkICML 2021 · 28 citations
- Bias-Free Scalable Gaussian Processes via Randomized TruncationsAndres Potapczynski, Luhuan Wu, Dan Biderman, Geoff Pleiss et al.ICML 2021 · 23 citations
- Probabilistic Linear Solvers for Machine LearningJonathan Wenger, Philipp HennigNeurIPS 2020 · 19 citations
Related papers
- Bezier Gaussian Processes for Tall and Wide DataMartin Jørgensen, Michael A. OsborneNeurIPS 2022 · 2 citations
- Parametric Gaussian Process RegressorsMartin Jankowiak, Geoff Pleiss, Jacob R. GardnerICML 2020 · 82 citations
- Sampling from Gaussian Process Posteriors using Stochastic Gradient DescentJihao Andreas Lin, Javier Antorán, Shreyas Padhy, David Janz et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 34 citations
- Improved Convergence Rates for Sparse Approximation Methods in Kernel-Based LearningSattar Vakili, Jonathan Scarlett, Da-Shan Shiu, Alberto BernacchiaICML 2022 · 23 citations
- Beyond the Mean-Field: Structured Deep Gaussian Processes Improve the Predictive UncertaintiesJakob Lindinger, David Reeb, Christoph Lippert, Barbara RakitschNeurIPS 2020 · 8 citations
