2016
DOI: 10.1109/tpami.2015.2448083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fast Direct Methods for Gaussian Processes

Abstract: A number of problems in probability and statistics can be addressed using the multivariate normal (Gaussian) distribution. In the one-dimensional case, computing the probability for a given mean and variance simply requires the evaluation of the corresponding Gaussian density. In the n-dimensional setting, however, it requires the inversion of an n ×n covariance matrix, C, as well as the evaluation of its determinant, det(C). In many cases, such as regression using Gaussian processes, the covariance matrix is … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
369
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 548 publications
(386 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(88 reference statements)
0
369
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…To understand the disagreement between the K2 light curves and the activity indices we followed the recipe of Angus et al (2018), who suggest a Gaussian process (GP) with a quasi-period covariance kernel function as a more reliable method than those mentioned above to measure rotational periods of active stars. We performed our analysis using version 5 of PyORBIT 37 (Malavolta et al 2016), a package for RV and activity indices analysis, with the implementation of the GP quasi-period kernel as described in Grunblatt et al (2015), from which we inherit the mathematical notation, through the george 38 package (Ambikasaran et al 2015). As GP regression ordinarily scales with the third power of the number of data points, to ease the analysis of the K2 data set we binned the light curve every 3-4 points, paying attention that all the points within a bin belonged to the same section within two transits and checking that the binning process did not alter the overall shape of the light curve.…”
Section: Stellar Activitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To understand the disagreement between the K2 light curves and the activity indices we followed the recipe of Angus et al (2018), who suggest a Gaussian process (GP) with a quasi-period covariance kernel function as a more reliable method than those mentioned above to measure rotational periods of active stars. We performed our analysis using version 5 of PyORBIT 37 (Malavolta et al 2016), a package for RV and activity indices analysis, with the implementation of the GP quasi-period kernel as described in Grunblatt et al (2015), from which we inherit the mathematical notation, through the george 38 package (Ambikasaran et al 2015). As GP regression ordinarily scales with the third power of the number of data points, to ease the analysis of the K2 data set we binned the light curve every 3-4 points, paying attention that all the points within a bin belonged to the same section within two transits and checking that the binning process did not alter the overall shape of the light curve.…”
Section: Stellar Activitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GP component. The GP model utilizes the george package 7 (Ambikasaran et al 2014) and is used to model the out-of-eclipse (OOE) photometric data. A detailed description of GP regression is beyond the scope of this paper but the interested reader is referred to Roberts et al (2012) for a gentle introduction, Rasmussen & Williams (2006) for a more detailed entry, Aigrain et al (2012) for application to stellar light curves, and Gillen et al (2014) for application to EB light curves and cross-correlation functions.…”
Section: Gp-ebopmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2), and r is the data vector. We use the publicly available emcee algorithm (Foreman-Mackey et al 2013) to perform the MCMC analysis, and the publicly available GEORGE Python library to perform the GP fitting within the MCMC framework (Ambikasaran et al 2015). We used 150 random walkers to sample the parameter space.…”
Section: The Mcmc Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%