Replies: 2 comments
-
If we use the Gaussian distribution as reference I think it will be 99% the standard normal so we should be fine with whatever. For other applications of Gaussian distributions (e.g. as a prior for Bayesian inference) I think previous code used the traditional Cholesky factorization. tldr: I never used or needed fancy Gaussian implementation in my applications but maybe others did! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hey Danny! For now, I would just implement a standard normal distribution. In the future, if we find that we need a multivariate Gaussian implementation, I would take a hybrid approach with options for either the fast LL^T Cholesky decomposition or an eigenvalue decomposition. In practice I've run into many situations where the covariance matrix becomes nearly singular, but you still want to draw samples. This situation is relatively common with Gaussian processes (especially those involving periodic or constant kernels) or when you're considering Gaussian posteriors stemming from observations with very little noise. In MUQ's GP stack, we first attempt an LL^T decomposition and if that fails we then compute the more expensive eigenvalue decomposition. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Questions I'm chewing on regarding the Gaussian reference distribution implementation. Need expert opinion from those who work with covariance matrices and work on transport problems:
Any and all thoughts/advice are appreciated!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions