TL;DR
This paper introduces two automated methods for bounding the posterior distributions of discrete probabilistic programs with loops, providing guarantees and convergence properties, and demonstrates their effectiveness through implementation and benchmarks.
Contribution
The main novelty is the geometric bound semantics using contraction invariants and polynomial inequality constraints, enabling exponential bounds and broader applicability.
Findings
Both semantics are sound and converge to the true distribution.
The geometric approach provides exponential bounds on moments and tail behavior.
The Diabolo tool effectively applies these methods to various benchmarks.
Abstract
We study the problem of bounding the posterior distribution of discrete probabilistic programs with unbounded support, loops, and conditioning. Loops pose the main difficulty in this setting: even if exact Bayesian inference is possible, the state of the art requires user-provided loop invariant templates. By contrast, we aim to find guaranteed bounds, which sandwich the true distribution. They are fully automated, applicable to more programs and provide more provable guarantees than approximate sampling-based inference. Since lower bounds can be obtained by unrolling loops, the main challenge is upper bounds, and we attack it in two ways. The first is called residual mass semantics, which is a flat bound based on the residual probability mass of a loop. The approach is simple, efficient, and has provable guarantees. The main novelty of our work is the second approach, called…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
