Michael Tiemann

Katharina Ott, Prateek Katiyar, Philipp Hennig et al.

A key appeal of the recently proposed Neural Ordinary Differential Equation (ODE) framework is that it seems to provide a continuous-time extension of discrete residual neural networks. As we show herein, though, trained Neural ODE models actually depend on the specific numerical method used during training. If the trained model is supposed to be a flow generated from an ODE, it should be possible to choose another numerical solver with equal or smaller numerical error without loss of performance. We observe that if training relies on a solver with overly coarse discretization, then testing with another solver of equal or smaller numerical error results in a sharp drop in accuracy. In such cases, the combination of vector field and numerical method cannot be interpreted as a flow generated from an ODE, which arguably poses a fatal breakdown of the Neural ODE concept. We observe, however, that there exists a critical step size beyond which the training yields a valid ODE vector field. We propose a method that monitors the behavior of the ODE solver during training to adapt its step size, aiming to ensure a valid ODE without unnecessarily increasing computational cost. We verify this adaptation algorithm on a common bench mark dataset as well as a synthetic dataset.

Hans Kersting, Nicholas Krämer, Martin Schiegg et al.

Likelihood-free (a.k.a. simulation-based) inference problems are inverse problems with expensive, or intractable, forward models. ODE inverse problems are commonly treated as likelihood-free, as their forward map has to be numerically approximated by an ODE solver. This, however, is not a fundamental constraint but just a lack of functionality in classic ODE solvers, which do not return a likelihood but a point estimate. To address this shortcoming, we employ Gaussian ODE filtering (a probabilistic numerical method for ODEs) to construct a local Gaussian approximation to the likelihood. This approximation yields tractable estimators for the gradient and Hessian of the (log-)likelihood. Insertion of these estimators into existing gradient-based optimization and sampling methods engenders new solvers for ODE inverse problems. We demonstrate that these methods outperform standard likelihood-free approaches on three benchmark-systems.