Action-BED: Task-Driven Bayesian Experimental Design with Singly Intractable Objectives
Authors: Tom Rossa, Angus Phillips, Tom Rainforth
Organizations: Department of Statistics University of Oxford
Abstract
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.
Bayesian experimental design (BED) is a principled framework for data-efficient design of sequential experiments. However, existing BED methods are unable to adapt to dynamic constraints inherent in real-world tasks due to budget limitations, varying costs, or physical constraints that restrict how designs evolve over time. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach to BED that enables constrained optimization of experimental designs by combining offline pre-training of an amortized policy and a posterior network with online multi-step lookahead planning using scenario trees. We empirically demonstrate that our method yields substantially more informative design sequences than existing methods across a range of constrained BED tasks, while incurring only a modest additional computational overhead.
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.
Bayesian optimal experimental design (BOED) selects experiments to maximize information gain about model parameters. However, in decision-critical settings, reducing parameter uncertainty does not necessarily improve downstream decisions, as only specific parameter directions relevant to the objective truly matter. We propose GoBOED, a goal-driven BOED framework that directly optimizes experimental designs for a specified decision-making objective. GoBOED combines an amortized variational posterior surrogate with a differentiable convex decision layer, enabling gradient-based design optimization that is fully decision-focused. We theoretically show that GoBOED gradients are insensitive to parameter directions irrelevant to the decision objective, providing a formal justification for why goal-driven design achieves equivalent decision quality over a wider set of experimental designs than information-gain maximization. Empirically, across source localization, epidemic management, and pharmacokinetic control, GoBOED identifies designs that better align with downstream decision objectives and reveals that near-optimal design windows are substantially wider than those predicted by goal-agnostic BOED approaches.