atlas

Research map / Probabilistic and scientific modeling / Uncertainty and Gaussian processes

Improving Generalization with Flat Hilbert Bayesian Inference

ICML 2025 · Probabilistic and scientific modeling › Uncertainty and Gaussian processes · approach: Variational Bayesian deep learning · 0 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes Flat Hilbert Bayesian Inference (FHBI), a SAM-style functional sharpness-aware particle sampler in RKHS that targets the population posterior, evaluated with LoRA on ViT-B/16 over VTAB-1K.

Problem

Bayesian inference over neural network parameters typically approximates the empirical posterior, which overfits; the goal is to approximate the population posterior to improve generalization.

Approach

Extends sharpness-aware generalization bounds from Euclidean space to RKHS functional space and derives a two-step (adversarial functional perturbation + functional descent) SVGD-style particle update, which generalizes SVGD (rho=0) and SAM (one particle).

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Use FHBI (functional sharpness-aware particle update in RKHS, 4 particles) instead of SVGDLoRA Bayesian fine-tuning on ViT-B/16 · VTAB-1KTop-1 accuracy AVG: 73.7 vs 70.9Helped
Use FHBI instead of SAM (single model)LoRA fine-tuning on ViT-B/16 · VTAB-1KTop-1 accuracy AVG: 73.7 vs 70.5 (3.2 points)Helped
Use multiple particles (FHBI 4p) instead of single particle SAM (ablation)CIFAR100 natural subset · VTAB-1K Natural datasetsTop-1 accuracy (CIFAR100): 74.8 vs 72.7Helped
Increase particles from 4 to 10 (ablation)FHBI · VTAB-1K Natural datasetsTop-1 accuracy: small gains on most datasets (e.g., CIFAR100 74.8 to 75.0), Flower102 drops 99.4 to 99.1Mixed
Use polynomial kernel (degree 10) instead of RBF kernel (ablation)FHBI · Specialized datasets (4)Top-1 accuracy AVG: 86.5 vs 86.8Hurt
Use FHBI instead of SVGD (sharpness-aware update lowers particle sharpness) (ablation)Particle sharpness on KITTI · KITTIparticle sharpness evolution: lower and more stable sharpness than SVGDHelped
Use FHBI instead of SVGDExpected calibration error · VTAB-1KECE AVG: 0.12 vs 0.18 (SVGD)Helped

Surprising findings

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: VTAB-1K

Benchmarks: VTAB-1K

Metrics: Top-1 accuracy Expected Calibration Error

Baselines: FFT AdamW SAM DeepEns BayesTune SGLD SADA-JEM SA-BNN SVGD

Builds on: Stein Variational Gradient Descent Sharpness-Aware Minimization LoRA SA-BNN SADA-JEM

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy