A Divergence-Based Method for Weighting and Averaging Model Predictions

Bayesian model averaging in support-indexed regression induces a posterior distribution over active predictor supports. Under predictor redundancy, posterior mass can spread across many nearly interchangeable supports, making exact-support summaries unstable or hard to interpret even when prediction is stable. We study how to report an already fitted Bayesian model averaging posterior without changing the Bayesian target. A report uses hard or soft regions of support space, and its compressed reporting law is compared with the reference posterior through an explicit density ratio. This ratio gives computable total-variation and Kullback--Leibler distortion, bounds for bounded predictive summaries, retained-mass diagnostics, and fallback-weight diagnostics. The framework covers fixed hard regions, metric-ball regions, posterior-cluster regions, and pooled-pruned region dictionaries. We prove exact error formulas and validation bounds for these region reports, and give conditions under which a few regions can replace a long list of individual supports. In simulations, our region reports often give shorter and clearer summaries while preserving the main posterior information, and the density-ratio diagnostics show when too much information has been lost.

Vanilla variational inference finds an optimal approximation to the Bayesian posterior distribution, but even the exact Bayesian posterior is often not meaningful under model misspecification. We propose predictive variational inference (PVI): a general inference framework that seeks and samples from an optimal posterior density such that the resulting posterior predictive distribution is as close to the true data generating process as possible, while this closeness is measured by multiple scoring rules. By optimizing the objective, the predictive variational inference is generally not the same as, or even attempting to approximate, the Bayesian posterior, even asymptotically. Rather, we interpret it as implicit hierarchical expansion. Further, the learned posterior uncertainty detects heterogeneity of parameters among the population, enabling automatic model diagnosis. This framework applies to both likelihood-exact and likelihood-free models. We demonstrate its application in real data examples.

Conditional generative models have emerged as powerful tools for sampling from target conditional distributions, driving substantial advances across a wide range of scientific and applied domains. As these models proliferate, practitioners often face multiple plausible generators whose performance can vary with the task, data, or input condition. We propose an optimal model averaging framework for conditional generative models, allowing candidate generators to be combined even when they are accessible only through conditional samples without tractable densities. Specifically, we use a sample-based maximum mean discrepancy between conditional distributions, which first leads to a static model averaging method, StaticMA, assigning fixed weights to different candidates. In addition, we develop MoEMA (mixture-of-experts model averaging), an input-adaptive method that parameterizes covariate-dependent weights through a softmax neural-network gate. We establish in-sample and out-of-sample asymptotic optimality for the proposed methods, together with consistency of the estimated adaptive weight function under regularity conditions. The framework applies directly to Euclidean responses and extends to unstructured data by combining our formulation with fixed representation maps. Across a broad set of simulations and real-data studies spanning tabular, image, and text modalities, MoEMA generally improves over competing baselines, demonstrating the effectiveness of our proposed methods.