1. An Asymptotic Analysis of Generative, Discriminative, and Pseudolikelihood Estimators by Percy Liang and Michael Jordan (ICML 2008 ) Presented by Lihan He ECE, Duke University June 27, 2008

2. Introduction Exponential family estimators Generative Fully discriminative Pseudolikelihood discriminative Asymptotic analysis Experiments Conclusions Outline

3. Introduction  Data points are not considered to be drawn independently.  There are correlations between data points.  Given data, we have to consider the joint distribution over all the data points.  Correspondingly, the overall likelihood is not the product of the likelihood for each data point.

4. Introduction Generative vs. Discriminative Generative model: A model for randomly generating observed data; Learning a joint probability distribution over both observations and labels Discriminative model: A model only of the label variables conditional on the observed data; Learning a conditional distribution over labels given observations

5. Introduction Full Likelihood vs. Pseudolikelihood Full likelihood: Pseudolikelihood: An approximation of the full likelihood; Computationally more efficient. Could be intractable; Computationally inefficient. A set of dependencies between data points

6. Estimators Exponential Family Estimators for features model parameters normalization Example: conditional random field

7. Estimators Composite Likelihood Estimators [Lindsay 1988]  One class of pseudolikelihood estimator;  Consists of a weighted sum of component likelihoods, each of which is the probability of one subset of data points conditioned on another.  Partitions the output space (denoted by r) according to a fixed distribution P r, and obtains the component likelihood.  Defines criterion function which reflects the quality of the estimator.  The maximum composite likelihood estimator

8. Estimators Three estimators to be compared in the paper:  Generative: one component  Fully discriminative: one component  Pseudolikelihood discriminative: for each data point, we have one component

9. Estimators Risk Decomposition Bayes risk have only finite dataintrinsic suboptimality of the estimator Define unrelated to data samples z

10. Asymptotic Analysis before Well-specified model:, achieves O(n -1 ) convergence rate. Misspecified model:only fully discriminative estimator achieves O(n -1 ) rate.

11. Asymptotic Analysis

12. Experiments Toy example:four-node binary-valued graphical model True model: Learned model: When, the learned model is well-specified; When, the learned model is misspecified.

13. Experiments well-specified misspecified

14. Experiments Part-of-speech (POS) Tagging: Input: a sequence of words Output: a sequence of POS tags, i.e. noun, verb,etc. (45 tags total) Specified model: Node features : indicator functions of the form Edge features : indicator functions of the form Training: Wall Street Journal, 38K sentences. Testing: Wall Street Journal, 5.5K sentences, different sections from training.

15. Experiments Use the learned generative model to sample 1000 training samples and 1000 test samples, as synthetic data.

16. Conclusions  When model is well-specified: Three estimators all achieve O(n -1 ) convergence rate; There are no approximation error; The asymptotic estimation error generative < fully discriminative < pseudolikelihood discriminative  When model is misspecified: Fully discriminative estimator still achieves O(n -1 ) convergence rate, but the other two estimators achieve O(n -1/2 ) convergence rate ; The approximation error and asymptotic estimation error for fully discriminative estimator is lower than the generative estimator and the pseudolikelihood discriminative estimator.