Calibrated Derivative-Process Sensitivity for Gaussian-Process Variable Selection
TL;DR
It is shown that a studentized multiplier bootstrap of the GP derivative process repairs both its validity through an invariance principle for quadratic forms, and it is shown that asymptotic family-wise and false-discovery-rate control across inputs are obtained.
Abstract
Automatic relevance determination (ARD), the default tool for variable selection in Gaussian-process (GP) regression, ranks inputs by inverse lengthscales -- which measure how fast a function varies, not how much an input contributes to prediction -- and offers no calibrated rule for deciding which inputs to keep. The prediction-centred alternative, the derivative sensitivity $\nu_j = \mathbb{E}[(\partial f/\partial x_j)^2]$, is available in closed form from a fitted GP, but turning it into a selection rule is harder than it looks: at a null input the estimator is a degenerate quadratic form, so Wald and Bernstein-von Mises cutoffs are anti-conservative, and the natural residual bootstrap is mis-scaled. We show that a studentized multiplier bootstrap of the GP derivative process repairs both, prove its validity through an invariance principle for quadratic forms, and obtain asymptotic family-wise and false-discovery-rate control across inputs. Over 100 replications the rule controls FDR wherever inputs are truly null, while uncalibrated derivative rankings breach the target by up to 2x and a Bernstein-von Mises cutoff by 2.2x; at matched FDR it loses no power; it holds under a Mat\'ern kernel and input correlation up to 0.99; on real data with planted and authentic null inputs it admits 5-12x fewer spurious inputs; it costs 5-18% of the GP fit; and a block-averaged variant retains validity at cost linear in $n$.
