Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle NaNs in the logp in SMC #7293

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

astoeriko
Copy link

@astoeriko astoeriko commented Apr 29, 2024

Description

The changes deal with the case that the logp is NaN in the SMC sampler.
With the changes, samples with a NaN-logp will be simply discarded during the resampling step by assigning them a logp of -inf.

I know that this is not an ideal solution to the problem, but rather a pragmatic workaround. Maybe it would be wise to add a warning that there were NaN values?

Related Issue

Checklist

Type of change

  • New feature / enhancement
  • Bug fix
  • Documentation
  • Maintenance
  • Other (please specify):

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pymc--7293.org.readthedocs.build/en/7293/

Copy link

welcome bot commented Apr 29, 2024

Thank You Banner]
💖 Thanks for opening this pull request! 💖 The PyMC community really appreciates your time and effort to contribute to the project. Please make sure you have read our Contributing Guidelines and filled in our pull request template to the best of your ability.

@aseyboldt
Copy link
Member

Thank you for the PR!

It would be nice if we can come up with a test that this is in fact enough.
Maybe we can arbitrarily introduce some nan values into a model, and sample it? So for instance

with pm.Model():
    x = pm.Normal("x")
    pm.Normal("y", mu=x, sigma=0.1, observed=1)
    # Return nan in 50% of the prior draws
    pm.Potential("make_nan", pt.where(pt.geq(x, 0), 0, np.nan))

@astoeriko
Copy link
Author

Testing this with a simple example would be great! I was wondering if there is a way to artificially introduce NaN values in a model. So thanks for providing an example, this will help me verify with a simpler model if the problems I am seeing when sampling with SMC are indeed related to not handling NaN values.
I am still not very clear about what the test should test in the end. That we do not end up with a single sample per chain?

@aseyboldt
Copy link
Member

I think checking that all samples are positive and the posterior variance is reasonable should be enough.
The true posterior standard deviation should be $\sqrt{(1 + 1/100)^{-1}} \approx 0.1$, so maybe we just check that it's between 0.05 and 0.2 or so? We could also be more thorough and do a ks test against the true posterior, but I think for our purposes here that shouldn't be necessary.

@aloctavodia
Copy link
Member

Hi @astoeriko, are you still interested in this PR?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

BUG: NaNs in logp mess up resampling step in SMC
3 participants