Constrained Bayesian Experimental Design via Online Planning

Bayesian experimental design (BED) has traditionally been based on maximising expected uncertainty reductions from prior to posterior. A major shortfall of this approach is that it leads to doubly intractable objectives that are difficult to optimise, while customising them to particular downstream tasks of interest can also be difficult. Following first principles decision theory, we demonstrate that BED can alternatively be formulated in terms of an expected future loss (EFL) on downstream actions, providing a simple and naturally task-driven framework. Critically, we then show that all such EFLs can be rearranged into singly intractable objectives that can be jointly optimised with respect to both the design policy and a downstream action policy using stochastic gradients, an approach we refer to as ACTION-BED. This formulation further sidesteps the need for any explicit posterior or marginal likelihood estimation and is naturally implicit, requiring only the ability to sample from the joint model over model parameters and data, and evaluate the downstream loss function. It thus allows design policies to be learned more effectively, efficiently, and simply than existing methods, while providing easy customisation to different downstream tasks and losses.

Policy-based approaches to Bayesian experimental design (BED) allow the learning of deep policy networks that adaptively make intelligent design decisions based on previously collected data. However, the training of such policies is often held back by a fundamental challenge: the double intractability of the expected information gain (EIG). This necessitates expensive or complex approximations that restrict the effort one can invest in optimising the policy itself. To address this, we show that the double intractability of the EIG can be isolated from the policy learning by first solving a score matching problem that is independent of the policy used, then using the learned score approximation to train the policy in a singly intractable manner. This turns the key multiplicative cost into an additive one and reduces the computational burden on the policy training itself, making it far cheaper to train the policy multiple times when needed, e.g. for architecture search, hyperparameter tuning, or avoiding local optima. In our experiments we train multiple competitive policies without inducing a multiplicative cost in likelihood evaluations, which can increase performance by allowing us to select the best policy even without performing hyperparameter or architecture searches.

Computational cognitive modeling seeks to infer latent cognitive mechanisms underlying observed behavior. Bayesian inverse planning provides a principled framework for such inference, but its success depends critically on the experimental environment. Existing approaches typically treat environments as fixed, leaving open the question of which cognitive experiments are most informative for cognition parameter inference. We formulate the design of cognitive planning experiments as a Bayesian Experimental Design (BED) problem, treating the experimental environment as the design variable. We establish an exact Monte Carlo BED benchmark and introduce an amortized Bayesian experimental design framework for efficient posterior inference and design evaluation. Experiments on the Mouselab-MDP process-tracing paradigm show that amortized BED closely matches the environment rankings of exact Monte Carlo BED while substantially reducing computational cost. We further show that no single environment is uniformly optimal across cognitive inference objectives, revealing trade-offs between expected information gain, posterior recoverability, and information efficiency. These results provide a principled framework for designing informative cognitive experiments for Bayesian parameter inference.