Authors: Pei-Hsuan Hsia, Lars H. Heyen, Arvid Weyrauch, Markus Goetz, Achim Streit, Sebastian Krumscheid, Charlotte Debus
Abstract
In Bayesian neural networks (BNNs), variational inference is a widely adopted framework for modeling uncertainty in a distributional way, with the evidence lower bound (ELBO) serving as the standard objective function. Several distributions contribute to the ELBO loss, such as the prior, approximated posterior, and likelihood distribution. Typically, these distributions are all approximated by a Gaussian distribution, since it is easy to compute, allows for reparameterized gradients, and provides a closed-form loss for training. However, several works have highlighted that this assumption may not generally hold, posing the risk of model misspecification. Alternative distributions have been proposed for the prior specifically, while the effect of distribution choice on the likelihood distribution remains unexplored. In this work, our aim is to close this gap by investigating whether alternative assumptions for the likelihood distribution can outperform the commonly used Gaussian. We compare several likelihood distribution assumptions, such as skewed or heavy-tailed, across regression tasks on both artificial and real-world datasets using standard multilayer perceptrons (MLPs). Our findings demonstrate that Student's t yields better predictive performance than a Gaussian likelihood distribution, independent of the data distribution and MLP architecture (depth and width). In some cases, Student's t can also lead to shorter training times, while still being easy to implement.
Bayesian neural networks are typically trained against the evidence lower bound (ELBO), whose Jensen gap closes only when the variational posterior is exact. We instead train by local consistency: gradient descent on the Bethe free energy, driving the belief at every factor toward agreement with its neighbours rather than placing a loss on the output. The resulting objective scores each observation by its own predictive density: a strictly proper rule whose optimum is the true conditional, for any likelihood with a tractable predictive convolution. Instantiated with a Gaussian last layer over a deterministic backbone, exact inference appears as one known corner: the neural-linear marginal likelihood. That corner is evidence-optimal; the shared-cavity, free-routed interior is predictive-optimal, improving NLL and calibration over it. This instance, SCROLL (Shared-Cavity fRee-rOuting Last-Layer), is a single-pass Bayesian neural network: batchable, any-likelihood, and implicitly empirical-Bayes-prior precision, observation noise, covariance, and backbone fit in one gradient pass. Prior work enters the interior only through the ELBO and its Jensen gap, even in this conjugate setting. At a single training run and forward pass per architecture-where the validation-tuned conventional references cross-validate λ and ensembles pay 5-50× at inference-a fixed SCROLL variant is best-or-tied on NLL and calibration on 7/8 UCI regression benchmarks, and best on 4/5 across three large tabular datasets (up to 515k examples) and two frozen text/vision embeddings.
Uncertainty estimation is essential for robust decision-making in the presence of ambiguous or out-of-distribution inputs. Gaussian Processes (GPs) are classical kernel-based models that offer principled uncertainty quantification and perform well on small- to medium-scale datasets. Alternatively, formulating the weight space learning problem under tensor network assumptions yields scalable tensor network kernel machines. However, these assumptions break Gaussianity, complicating standard probabilistic inference. This raises a fundamental question: how can tensor network kernel machines provide principled uncertainty estimates? We propose a novel Bayesian Tensor Network Kernel Machine (LA-TNKM) that employs a (linearized) Laplace approximation for Bayesian inference. A comprehensive set of numerical experiments shows that the proposed method consistently matches or surpasses Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Neural Networks (BNNs) across diverse UCI regression benchmarks, highlighting both its effectiveness and practical relevance.
The practical adoption of sampling-based inference (SAI) in Bayesian neural networks (BNNs) remains limited, partly due to persistent misconceptions about the feasibility and efficiency of sampling. This position paper argues that SAI has achieved computational parity with optimization-based methods and is at the verge of superseding such methods for effective and efficient inference in BNNs. This development should be in the interest of the whole community, promoting BNNs as a principled paradigm with its long-standing yet unfulfilled promise of providing principled uncertainty quantification for neural networks. SAI can even do more -- yielding superior prediction performance through model averaging, serving as the foundation for a plethora of possible downstream tasks, and providing crucial insights into the landscape of BNNs. In order to make such a change happen and unfold the potential of sampling, overcoming current misconceptions is a necessary first step. The next step is to realign research efforts toward addressing remaining challenges in SAI. In particular, the community must focus on two core problems: sufficient exploration of the posterior landscape and high-fidelity distillation of posterior samples for efficient downstream inference. By addressing conceptual and practical obstacles, we can unlock the full potential of SAI and establish it as a central tool in Bayesian deep learning.