Learning Bayesian Network Structure using LP Relaxations
By Tommi S. Jaakkola, David A. Sontag, Amir Globerson, Marina Meila. 2010
236 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Graph Learning
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Graph Learning
- Simon Lacoste-Julien
- Sébastien Lachapelle
- Philippe Brouillard
- Pratik Chaudhari
- Stefano Soatto
- James Cussens
- Tian Gao
- Marloes H. Maathuis
Citations in the corpus
- Gradient-Based Neural DAG Learning (2019, methodology): “There exists certain score-based approaches which uses integer linear programming (ILP) (Jaakkola et al., 2010; Cussens, 2011) which internally solve continuous linear relaxations.”
- Schema Networks: Zero-shot Transfer with a Generative Causal Model of Intuitive Physics (2017, neutral): “See Jaakkola et al. (2010) for further work on applying LP relaxations to structure learning.”
- DAG-GNN: DAG Structure Learning with Graph Neural Networks (2019, methodology): “Many exact and approximate algorithms for learning DAG from data have been developed, including score-based and constraint-based approaches (Spirtes et al., 2000a; Chicker-ing, 2002; Koivisto & Sood, 2004; Silander & Myllymaki, 2006; Jaakkola et al., 2010; Cussens, 2011; Yuan & Malone, 2013).”
- Structure Learning in Graphical Modeling (2016, background): “More recently, authors such as Jaakkola et al. (2010), Cussens & Bartlett (2013) and Studen´y & Haws (2014) suggested integer linear programming approaches, in which the search over graph structures is formulated as a linear program over a polytope P representing DAGs.”
- The Effect of Gradient Noise on the Energy Landscape of Deep Networks (2015, methodology): “In our aim to trivialize the loss function and sequentially tighten this relaxation, our work also relates to convex relaxation strategies used in machine learning, e.g., maximum-a-posteriori estimation (Jaakkola et al., 2010) and sparse principal component analysis (Wang et al., 2014).”
- Machine Learning of Bayesian Networks Using Constraint Programming (2015, methodology): “Its correctness is based on the following well-known property of directed acyclic graphs that is also used in the ILP approaches [7, 8].”
- Bayesian network learning with cutting planes (2011, methodology): “Thanks to Ricardo Silva for pointing me to Jaakkola et al [9].”
- Efficient Structure Learning of Bayesian Networks using Constraints (2011, background): “The re-c search on this topic is active (Chickering, 2002; Teyssier and Koller, 2005; Tsamardinos et al., 2006; Silander and Myllymaki, 2006; Parviainen and Koivisto, 2009; de Campos et al., 2009; Jaakkola et al., 2010), mostly focused on complete data.”
- Bayesian Networks for Variable Groups (2015, background): “Although the problem is NP-hard (Chickering, 1996), there exist plenty of exact algorithms (Jaakkola et al., 2010; Silander and Myllymäki, 2006) as well as theoretically sound heuristics (Aliferis et al., 2010; Chickering, 2002).”
- On the energy landscape of deep networks (2015, methodology): “Local minima proliferate the energy landscape: there are exponentially many of them, at all energy levels.”
- Learning structures of Bayesian networks for variable groups (2015, background): “Although the problem is NP-hard [4], there exist plenty of exact algorithms [7, 14, 20] as well as theoretically sound heuristics [1, 5].”
- Optimization Models for Machine Learning: A Survey (2019, methodology): “Mixed-integer programming formulations of the Bayesian network structure learning have been proposed [13] and solved by using relaxations [124], cutting planes [15, 51, 77], and heuristics [100, 216].”