Stochastic gradient descent (SGD) is the workhorse of modern machine learning. Sometimes, there are many different potential gradient estimators that can be used. When so, choosing the one with the best tradeoff between cost and variance is important. This paper analyzes the convergence rates of SGD as a function of time, rather than iterations. This results in a simple rule to select the estimator that leads to the best optimization convergence guarantee. This choice is the same for different variants of SGD, and with different assumptions about the objective (e.g. convexity or smoothness). Inspired by this principle, we propose a technique to automatically select an estimator when a finite pool of estimators is given. Then, we extend to infinite pools of estimators, where each one is indexed by control variate weights. This is enabled by a reduction to a mixed-integer quadratic program. Empirically, automatically choosing an estimator performs comparably to the best estimator chosen with hindsight.
Variational inference is increasingly being addressed with stochastic optimization. In this setting, the gradient's variance plays a crucial role in the optimization procedure, since high variance gradients lead to poor convergence. A popular approach used to reduce gradient's variance involves the use of control variates. Despite the good results obtained, control variates developed for variational inference are typically looked at in isolation. In this paper we clarify the large number of control variates that are available by giving a systematic view of how they are derived. We also present a Bayesian risk minimization framework in which the quality of a procedure for combining control variates is quantified by its effect on optimization convergence rates, which leads to a very simple combination rule. Results show that combining a large number of control variates this way significantly improves the convergence of inference over using the typical gradient estimators or a reduced number of control variates.
Fully observable non-deterministic (FOND) planning is becoming increasingly important as an approach for computing proper policies in probabilistic planning, extended temporal plans in LTL planning, and general plans in generalized planning. In this work, we introduce a SAT encoding for FOND planning that is compact and can produce compact strong cyclic policies. Simple variations of the encodings are also introduced for strong planning and for what we call, dual FOND planning, where some non-deterministic actions are assumed to be fair (e.g., probabilistic) and others unfair (e.g., adversarial). The resulting FOND planners are compared empirically with existing planners over existing and new benchmarks. The notion of "probabilistic interesting problems" is also revisited to yield a more comprehensive picture of the strengths and limitations of current FOND planners and the proposed SAT approach.