arXiv:2608.02305cs.LGcs.AI2026-08

提出一种非贪婪的特征获取方法,通过贝尔曼风险回归提升预测准确率。

BRiG-AFA: Bellman Risk-to-Go Learning for Non-Myopic Active Feature Acquisition

论文配图:BRiG-AFA: Bellman Risk-to-Go Learning for Non-Myopic Active Feature Acquisition
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 基于贝尔曼方程反向学习每种预算下的风险预估函数
  • 在Fashion-MNIST上4次采样时准确率提升10.20±0.74个百分点
  • 适合需权衡长期收益的主动特征选择场景

主动特征获取(AFA)在预算限制下决定每个测试样本下一步应测量哪个未观测特征。贪心策略易忽略后续才能体现价值的上下文特征,而强化学习和生成方法则面临复杂优化或条件密度估计问题。本文提出 extit{BRiG-AFA},一种可部署的监督型替代方案,为每个剩余预算学习独立的候选特征条件风险到终点函数。从一步终止分类风险出发,使用贝尔曼目标反向拟合该函数;推理阶段仅依赖已观测值、掩码、候选标识和剩余预算,贪婪地最小化学习到的终止风险。受控的非短视基准显示:在预算为2和3时,相比单步消融,准确率分别提升4.84±2.17和4.39±1.10百分点(五种子平均±标准误)。在包含20个候选像素的Fashion-MNIST上,所有非平凡预算下的平均准确率均提升,尤其在4次采集时达10.20±0.74个百分点;在{2,4,8,12,16}各预算下的配对平均增益为3.50±0.37个百分点。三种子的MiniBooNE研究在小预算下结果混杂,但在8和16次采集时呈正向,揭示当前边界而非支持普适结论。这些结果确立了直接贝尔曼风险回归的机制有效性,并明确了仍需开展的实验以进行最先进比较。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Active feature acquisition (AFA) asks which unobserved feature to measure next for each test instance under a budget. Greedy rules are easy to train but can overlook context features whose value is realized only through later acquisitions, while reinforcement-learning and generative approaches introduce difficult optimization or conditional-density estimation. We introduce \method, a deployable, supervised alternative that learns a separate candidate-conditioned risk-to-go function for every remaining budget. Starting from the one-step terminal classification risk, the functions are fitted backward with Bellman targets; inference greedily minimizes the learned terminal risk using only observed values, the mask, candidate identity, and remaining budget. A controlled non-myopic benchmark shows the expected mechanism: at budgets two and three, \method improves accuracy over its one-step ablation by $4.84\pm2.17$ and $4.39\pm1.10$ percentage points (mean $\pm$ standard error over five seeds). On Fashion-MNIST with 20 candidate pixels, it improves accuracy at every nontrivial reported budget on average, including $10.20\pm0.74$ points at four acquisitions; its mean paired gain across budgets $\{2,4,8,12,16\}$ is $3.50\pm0.37$ points. A three-seed MiniBooNE study is mixed at small budgets but positive at 8 and 16 acquisitions, identifying a current boundary rather than supporting a universal claim. These results establish a reproducible mechanism-level case for direct Bellman risk regression and delimit the experiments still needed for state-of-the-art comparison.

主动学习风险建模序列决策

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。