skip to main content


Title: Gradient‐Based Inverse Estimation for a Rainfall‐Runoff Model
Abstract

Recent advances in deep learning for neural networks with large numbers of parameters have been enabled by automatic differentiation, an algorithmic technique for calculating gradients of measures of model fit with respect to model parameters. Estimation of high‐dimensional parameter sets is an important problem within the hydrological sciences. Here, we demonstrate the effectiveness of gradient‐based estimation techniques for high‐dimensional inverse estimation problems using a conceptual rainfall‐runoff model. In particular, we compare the effectiveness of Hamiltonian Monte Carlo and automatic differentiation variational inference against two nongradient‐dependent methods, random walk Metropolis and differential evolution Metropolis. We show that the former two techniques exhibit superior performance for inverse estimation of daily rainfall values and are much more computationally efficient on larger data sets in an experiment with synthetic data. We also present a case study evaluating the effectiveness of automatic differentiation variational inference for inverse estimation over 25 years of daily precipitation conditional on streamflow observations at three catchments and show that it is scalable to very high dimensional parameter spaces. The presented results highlight the power of combining hydrological process‐based models with optimization techniques from deep learning for high‐dimensional estimation problems.

 
more » « less
NSF-PAR ID:
10455814
Author(s) / Creator(s):
 ;  ;  
Publisher / Repository:
DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Water Resources Research
Volume:
55
Issue:
8
ISSN:
0043-1397
Page Range / eLocation ID:
p. 6625-6639
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. One of the most common types of models that helps us to understand neuron behavior is based on the Hodgkin–Huxley ion channel formulation (HH model). A major challenge with inferring parameters in HH models is non-uniqueness: many different sets of ion channel parameter values produce similar outputs for the same input stimulus. Such phenomena result in an objective function that exhibits multiple modes (i.e., multiple local minima). This non-uniqueness of local optimality poses challenges for parameter estimation with many algorithmic optimization techniques. HH models additionally have severe non-linearities resulting in further challenges for inferring parameters in an algorithmic fashion. To address these challenges with a tractable method in high-dimensional parameter spaces, we propose using a particular Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm, which has the advantage of inferring parameters in a Bayesian framework. The Bayesian approach is designed to be suitable for multimodal solutions to inverse problems. We introduce and demonstrate the method using a three-channel HH model. We then focus on the inference of nine parameters in an eight-channel HH model, which we analyze in detail. We explore how the MCMC algorithm can uncover complex relationships between inferred parameters using five injected current levels. The MCMC method provides as a result a nine-dimensional posterior distribution, which we analyze visually with solution maps or landscapes of the possible parameter sets. The visualized solution maps show new complex structures of the multimodal posteriors, and they allow for selection of locally and globally optimal value sets, and they visually expose parameter sensitivities and regions of higher model robustness. We envision these solution maps as enabling experimentalists to improve the design of future experiments, increase scientific productivity and improve on model structure and ideation when the MCMC algorithm is applied to experimental data. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    The successes of deep learning, variational inference, and many other fields have been aided by specialized implementations of reverse-mode automatic differentiation (AD) to compute gradients of mega-dimensional objectives. The AD techniques underlying these tools were designed to compute exact gradients to numerical precision, but modern machine learning models are almost always trained with stochastic gradient descent. Why spend computation and memory on exact (minibatch) gradients only to use them for stochastic optimization? We develop a general framework and approach for randomized automatic differentiation (RAD), which can allow unbiased gradient estimates to be computed with reduced memory in return for variance. We examine limitations of the general approach, and argue that we must leverage problem specific structure to realize benefits. We develop RAD techniques for a variety of simple neural network architectures, and show that for a fixed memory budget, RAD converges in fewer iterations than using a small batch size for feedforward networks, and in a similar number for recurrent networks. We also show that RAD can be applied to scientific computing, and use it to develop a low-memory stochastic gradient method for optimizing the control parameters of a linear reaction-diffusion PDE representing a fission reactor. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    Inference is crucial in modern astronomical research, where hidden astrophysical features and patterns are often estimated from indirect and noisy measurements. Inferring the posterior of hidden features, conditioned on the observed measurements, is essential for understanding the uncertainty of results and downstream scientific interpretations. Traditional approaches for posterior estimation include sampling-based methods and variational inference (VI). However, sampling-based methods are typically slow for high-dimensional inverse problems, while VI often lacks estimation accuracy. In this paper, we proposeα-deep probabilistic inference, a deep learning framework that first learns an approximate posterior usingα-divergence VI paired with a generative neural network, and then produces more accurate posterior samples through importance reweighting of the network samples. It inherits strengths from both sampling and VI methods: it is fast, accurate, and more scalable to high-dimensional problems than conventional sampling-based approaches. We apply our approach to two high-impact astronomical inference problems using real data: exoplanet astrometry and black hole feature extraction.

     
    more » « less
  4. Obeid, I. (Ed.)
    The Neural Engineering Data Consortium (NEDC) is developing the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus (TUDP), an open source database of high-resolution images from scanned pathology samples [1], as part of its National Science Foundation-funded Major Research Instrumentation grant titled “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning” [2]. The long-term goal of this project is to release one million images. We have currently scanned over 100,000 images and are in the process of annotating breast tissue data for our first official corpus release, v1.0.0. This release contains 3,505 annotated images of breast tissue including 74 patients with cancerous diagnoses (out of a total of 296 patients). In this poster, we will present an analysis of this corpus and discuss the challenges we have faced in efficiently producing high quality annotations of breast tissue. It is well known that state of the art algorithms in machine learning require vast amounts of data. Fields such as speech recognition [3], image recognition [4] and text processing [5] are able to deliver impressive performance with complex deep learning models because they have developed large corpora to support training of extremely high-dimensional models (e.g., billions of parameters). Other fields that do not have access to such data resources must rely on techniques in which existing models can be adapted to new datasets [6]. A preliminary version of this breast corpus release was tested in a pilot study using a baseline machine learning system, ResNet18 [7], that leverages several open-source Python tools. The pilot corpus was divided into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Portions of these slides were manually annotated [1] using the nine labels in Table 1 [8] to identify five to ten examples of pathological features on each slide. Not every pathological feature is annotated, meaning excluded areas can include focuses particular to these labels that are not used for training. A summary of the number of patches within each label is given in Table 2. To maintain a balanced training set, 1,000 patches of each label were used to train the machine learning model. Throughout all sets, only annotated patches were involved in model development. The performance of this model in identifying all the patches in the evaluation set can be seen in the confusion matrix of classification accuracy in Table 3. The highest performing labels were background, 97% correct identification, and artifact, 76% correct identification. A correlation exists between labels with more than 6,000 development patches and accurate performance on the evaluation set. Additionally, these results indicated a need to further refine the annotation of invasive ductal carcinoma (“indc”), inflammation (“infl”), nonneoplastic features (“nneo”), normal (“norm”) and suspicious (“susp”). This pilot experiment motivated changes to the corpus that will be discussed in detail in this poster presentation. To increase the accuracy of the machine learning model, we modified how we addressed underperforming labels. One common source of error arose with how non-background labels were converted into patches. Large areas of background within other labels were isolated within a patch resulting in connective tissue misrepresenting a non-background label. In response, the annotation overlay margins were revised to exclude benign connective tissue in non-background labels. Corresponding patient reports and supporting immunohistochemical stains further guided annotation reviews. The microscopic diagnoses given by the primary pathologist in these reports detail the pathological findings within each tissue site, but not within each specific slide. The microscopic diagnoses informed revisions specifically targeting annotated regions classified as cancerous, ensuring that the labels “indc” and “dcis” were used only in situations where a micropathologist diagnosed it as such. Further differentiation of cancerous and precancerous labels, as well as the location of their focus on a slide, could be accomplished with supplemental immunohistochemically (IHC) stained slides. When distinguishing whether a focus is a nonneoplastic feature versus a cancerous growth, pathologists employ antigen targeting stains to the tissue in question to confirm the diagnosis. For example, a nonneoplastic feature of usual ductal hyperplasia will display diffuse staining for cytokeratin 5 (CK5) and no diffuse staining for estrogen receptor (ER), while a cancerous growth of ductal carcinoma in situ will have negative or focally positive staining for CK5 and diffuse staining for ER [9]. Many tissue samples contain cancerous and non-cancerous features with morphological overlaps that cause variability between annotators. The informative fields IHC slides provide could play an integral role in machine model pathology diagnostics. Following the revisions made on all the annotations, a second experiment was run using ResNet18. Compared to the pilot study, an increase of model prediction accuracy was seen for the labels indc, infl, nneo, norm, and null. This increase is correlated with an increase in annotated area and annotation accuracy. Model performance in identifying the suspicious label decreased by 25% due to the decrease of 57% in the total annotated area described by this label. A summary of the model performance is given in Table 4, which shows the new prediction accuracy and the absolute change in error rate compared to Table 3. The breast tissue subset we are developing includes 3,505 annotated breast pathology slides from 296 patients. The average size of a scanned SVS file is 363 MB. The annotations are stored in an XML format. A CSV version of the annotation file is also available which provides a flat, or simple, annotation that is easy for machine learning researchers to access and interface to their systems. Each patient is identified by an anonymized medical reference number. Within each patient’s directory, one or more sessions are identified, also anonymized to the first of the month in which the sample was taken. These sessions are broken into groupings of tissue taken on that date (in this case, breast tissue). A deidentified patient report stored as a flat text file is also available. Within these slides there are a total of 16,971 total annotated regions with an average of 4.84 annotations per slide. Among those annotations, 8,035 are non-cancerous (normal, background, null, and artifact,) 6,222 are carcinogenic signs (inflammation, nonneoplastic and suspicious,) and 2,714 are cancerous labels (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma in situ.) The individual patients are split up into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Of the 74 cancerous patients, 20 were allotted for both the development and evaluation sets, while the remain 34 were allotted for train. The remaining 222 patients were split up to preserve the overall distribution of labels within the corpus. This was done in hope of creating control sets for comparable studies. Overall, the development and evaluation sets each have 80 patients, while the training set has 136 patients. In a related component of this project, slides from the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Biosample Repository (https://www.foxchase.org/research/facilities/genetic-research-facilities/biosample-repository -facility) are being digitized in addition to slides provided by Temple University Hospital. This data includes 18 different types of tissue including approximately 38.5% urinary tissue and 16.5% gynecological tissue. These slides and the metadata provided with them are already anonymized and include diagnoses in a spreadsheet with sample and patient ID. We plan to release over 13,000 unannotated slides from the FCCC Corpus simultaneously with v1.0.0 of TUDP. Details of this release will also be discussed in this poster. Few digitally annotated databases of pathology samples like TUDP exist due to the extensive data collection and processing required. The breast corpus subset should be released by November 2021. By December 2021 we should also release the unannotated FCCC data. We are currently annotating urinary tract data as well. We expect to release about 5,600 processed TUH slides in this subset. We have an additional 53,000 unprocessed TUH slides digitized. Corpora of this size will stimulate the development of a new generation of deep learning technology. In clinical settings where resources are limited, an assistive diagnoses model could support pathologists’ workload and even help prioritize suspected cancerous cases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grants nos. CNS-1726188 and 1925494. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. REFERENCES [1] N. Shawki et al., “The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York City, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 67 104. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030368432. [2] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning.” Major Research Instrumentation (MRI), Division of Computer and Network Systems, Award No. 1726188, January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2021. https://www. isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_dpath/. [3] A. Gulati et al., “Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognition,” in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH), 2020, pp. 5036-5040. https://doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2020-3015. [4] C.-J. Wu et al., “Machine Learning at Facebook: Understanding Inference at the Edge,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2019, pp. 331–344. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8675201. [5] I. Caswell and B. Liang, “Recent Advances in Google Translate,” Google AI Blog: The latest from Google Research, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/06/recent-advances-in-google-translate.html. [Accessed: 01-Aug-2021]. [6] V. Khalkhali, N. Shawki, V. Shah, M. Golmohammadi, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Low Latency Real-Time Seizure Detection Using Transfer Deep Learning,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2021, pp. 1 7. https://www.isip. piconepress.com/publications/conference_proceedings/2021/ieee_spmb/eeg_transfer_learning/. [7] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning,” Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2020. https://www.isip.piconepress.com/publications/reports/2020/nsf/mri_dpath/. [8] I. Hunt, S. Husain, J. Simons, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Recent Advances in the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2019, pp. 1–4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9037859. [9] A. P. Martinez, C. Cohen, K. Z. Hanley, and X. (Bill) Li, “Estrogen Receptor and Cytokeratin 5 Are Reliable Markers to Separate Usual Ductal Hyperplasia From Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ,” Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., vol. 140, no. 7, pp. 686–689, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2015-0238-OA. 
    more » « less
  5. SUMMARY Inverse problems play a central role in data analysis across the fields of science. Many techniques and algorithms provide parameter estimation including the best-fitting model and the parameters statistics. Here, we concern ourselves with the robustness of parameter estimation under constraints, with the focus on assimilation of noisy data with potential outliers, a situation all too familiar in Earth science, particularly in analysis of remote-sensing data. We assume a linear, or linearized, forward model relating the model parameters to multiple data sets with a priori unknown uncertainties that are left to be characterized. This is relevant for global navigation satellite system and synthetic aperture radar data that involve intricate processing for which uncertainty estimation is not available. The model is constrained by additional equalities and inequalities resulting from the physics of the problem, but the weights of equalities are unknown. We formulate the problem from a Bayesian perspective with non-informative priors. The posterior distribution of the model parameters, weights and outliers conditioned on the observations are then inferred via Gibbs sampling. We demonstrate the practical utility of the method based on a set of challenging inverse problems with both synthetic and real space-geodetic data associated with earthquakes and nuclear explosions. We provide the associated computer codes and expect the approach to be of practical interest for a wide range of applications. 
    more » « less