PreprintCited by 116Gaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksNeural Networks and Applications

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Generalized Product of Experts for Automatic and Principled Fusion of Gaussian Process Predictions

Open access

Abstract

In this work, we propose a generalized product of experts (gPoE) framework for combining the predictions of multiple probabilistic models. We identify four desirable properties that are important for scalability, expressiveness and robustness, when learning and inferring with a combination of multiple models. Through analysis and experiments, we show that gPoE of Gaussian processes (GP) have these qualities, while no other existing combination schemes satisfy all of them at the same time. The resulting GP-gPoE is highly scalable as individual GP experts can be independently learned in parallel; very expressive as the way experts are combined depends on the input rather than fixed; the combined prediction is still a valid probabilistic model with natural interpretation; and finally robust to unreliable predictions from individual experts.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1410.7827

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 5 · Cited by 116

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [2][2] Breiman, Leo. Bagging predictors. Machine Learning , 24 (2): 123140, 1996. -
  2. [4][4] R. Urtasun. Motion Models for Robust 3D Human Body Tracking. Phd Thesis 3541, EPFL 2006 -
  3. [6][6] E. Snelson and Z. Ghahramani. Sparse gaussian processes using pseudo-inputs. NIPS 18 , pp. 1257-1264. 2006. -
  4. [7][7] Y. Cao, M. Brubaker, D. J. Fleet, A. Hertzmann. Efficient Optimization for Sparse Gaussian Process Regression NIPS 2013 , 2013. -
  5. [8][8] James Hensman, Nicolo Fusi, Neil D. Lawrence. Gaussian Processes for Big Data NIPS 2013 , 2013.

Metadata

Authors
Cao, Y., & Fleet, D. J.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2014
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W241901432
Cited by
116
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Target Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
Keywords
Gaussian processes, prediction fusion, ensemble learning, scalability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review