Learning to Bound: Monotonic, Calibrated Neural Upper Bounds for MPE Inference
Organizations: The University of Texas at Dallas
Abstract
Probabilistic graphical models (PGMs) compactly encode structured joint distributions, but Most Probable Explanation (MPE), which finds the highest-probability assignment to unobserved variables, remains computationally intractable in large, densely structured models. Anytime systematic search, such as branch-and-bound (B&B), is a popular approach, but its efficiency depends on tight admissible upper bounds that are often prohibitively expensive to compute using classical methods like Mini-Bucket Elimination (MBE). We introduce Learning to Bound (L2B), a data-driven framework that amortizes bound computation cost by training a neural predictor. L2B targets two key properties required for effective search bounds: admissibility, which is achieved via statistical calibration techniques, and progressive tightening as evidence accumulates, which is enforced through structural architectural constraints that ensure monotonicity by construction. Across challenging benchmarks, L2B delivers tighter, monotonic bounds at orders-of-magnitude lower cost on every PGM family, and yields measurable improvements when integrated with branch-and-bound on high-treewidth instances.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | MPE ⋆ | JGLP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMNN (Ours) | UMLP (Ours) | SMNN (Ours) | UMLP (Ours) | |||||||
| Relative Gap | Cov | Relative Gap | Cov | Relative Gap | Cov | Relative Gap | Cov | Relative Gap | ||
| BN_9 | -23.81* | 0.3649 0.1745 | 0.97 | 0.0683 0.0351 | 0.99 | 0.0696 0.0357 | 1.00 | 0.1285 0.0396 | 1.00 | 0.1331 0.0414 |
| BN_12 | -19.71* | 0.3438 0.1896 | 0.97 | 0.1113 0.0615 | 0.93 | 0.0727 0.0365 | 0.99 | 0.1989 0.0858 | 1.00 | 0.1447 0.0423 |
| BN_14 | -26.51* | 0.3411 0.1954 | 0.92 | 0.0656 0.0385 | 0.95 | 0.0667 0.0365 | 0.99 | 0.1165 0.0469 | 1.00 | 0.1204 0.0419 |
| BN_30 | -14.66 | 0.3017 0.1558 | 1.00 | 0.0143 0.0137 | 0.95 | 0.0187 0.0104 | 1.00 | 0.0897 0.0142 | 1.00 | 0.0846 0.0206 |
| Family | Pairs | UMLP | SMNN (Ours) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw | Calib. | Raw | Calib. | ||
| Bayesian networks | 600 | 203 | 213 | 0 | 0 |
| Grids | 700 | 145 | 150 | 0 | 0 |
| Segmentation | 300 | 65 | 66 | 0 | 0 |
| Random uniform | 700 | 110 | 111 | 0 | 0 |
| WCSP | 300 | 117 | 114 | 0 | 0 |
| Instance | Method | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 m | 5 m | 10 m | 1 m | 5 m | 10 m | |||
| rus2_1 | 105 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0225 | +0.0225 | -0.2629 | +0.0225 | +0.0225 |
| UMLP | -0.1416 | -0.1541 | -0.1399 | -0.3020 | -0.1490 | -0.1399 | ||
| rus3_1 | 96 | SMNN | +0.0013 | +0.0013 | +0.0013 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 |
| UMLP | +0.0017 | +0.0020 | +0.0020 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 | +0.0020 | ||
| rus3_3 | 98 | SMNN | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 |
Appendix figures & tables11 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Dataset | Source | ||||
| Bayesian Networks | |||||
| BN_9, BN_12, BN_14 | 90–155 | 90–115 | 2 | 12–18 | UAI |
| BN_30, BN_32 | 1156–1444 | 1156–1444 | 2 | 15–22 | UAI |
| BN_70 | 2315 | 2315 | 36 | - | UAI |
| Grid Models | |||||
| grid10 10 | 100 | 300 | 2 | 10 | Ising |
| Gaussian | Conformal | Stratified Conformal | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calibrated bound | |||
| Parameters | |||
| = Gaussian quantile | |||
| Assumption | Gaussian errors | Exchangeability | Exchangeability |
| Adapts to | No | No | Yes |
| Guarantee | Asymptotic | Finite-sample | Finite-sample (per-stratum) |
| Dataset | #Variables | #Factors | Max domain |
|---|---|---|---|
| BN_9 | 105 | 105 | 2 |
| BN_12 | 90 | 90 | 2 |
| BN_14 | 115 | 115 | 2 |
| BN_30 | 1156 | 1156 | 2 |
| BN_32 | 1444 | 1444 | 2 |
| BN_70 | 2315 | 2315 | 36 |
| Instance | Method | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1m | 5m | 10m | 1m | 5m | 10m | |||
| rus2_1 | 105 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0225 | +0.0225 | -0.2629 | +0.0225 | +0.0225 |
| UMLP | -0.1416 | -0.1541 | -0.1399 | -0.3020 | -0.1490 | -0.1399 | ||
| rus3_1 | 96 | SMNN | +0.0013 | +0.0013 | +0.0013 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 |
| UMLP | +0.0017 | +0.0020 | +0.0020 | +0.0017 | +0.0017 | +0.0020 | ||
| rus3_3 | 98 | SMNN | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 | +0.0032 |
| Instance | Method | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1m | 5m | 10m | 1m | 5m | 10m | |||
| BN_9 | 22 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| UMLP | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | ||
| BN_12 | 28 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| UMLP | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | ||
| BN_14 | 26 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| Instance | Method | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20s | 40s | 1m | 20s | 40s | 1m | |||
| BN_9 | 22 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| UF | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | -0.0125 | ||
| BN_12 | 28 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| UF | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | -0.0153 | ||
| BN_14 | 26 | SMNN | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 | +0.0000 |
| Dataset | UMLP violations | SMNN violations ( monotone calib ) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw | Calibrated | Raw | Calibrated | ||
| wcsp_11 | 100 | 61/100 | 61/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
| wcsp_12 | 100 | 41/100 | 41/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
| wcsp_15 | 100 | 15/100 | 12/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
| rus_2_1 | 100 | 9/100 | 9/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
| rus_3_1 | 100 | 13/100 | 13/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
Probabilistic Graphical Models
Probabilistic graphical models represent joint distributions with graphs to support structured inference, learning, and reasoning under uncertainty.
See all 54 papers