Exact and approximate EM estimation of mutually exciting hawkes processes

Article

Abstract

Motivated by the availability of continuous event sequences that trace the social behavior in a population e.g. email, we believe that mutually exciting Hawkes processes provide a realistic and informative model for these sequences. For complex mutually exciting processes, the numerical optimization used for univariate self exciting processes may not provide stable estimates. Furthermore, convergence can be exceedingly slow, making estimation computationally expensive and multiple random restarts doubly so. We derive an expectation maximization algorithm for maximum likelihood estimation mutually exciting processes that is faster, more robust, and less biased than estimation based on numerical optimization. For an exponentially decaying excitement function, each EM step can be computed in a single \(O(N)\) pass through the data, for \(N\) observations, without requiring the entire dataset to be in memory. More generally, exact inference is \(\Theta (N^{2})\), but we identify some simple \(\Theta (N)\) approximation strategies that seem to provide good estimates while reducing the computational cost.

Keywords

Self-exciting point processes Estimation Expectation-maximization 

References

  1. Airoldi EM, Blei DM, Xing E, Fienberg SE (2005) A latent mixed membership model for relational data. In: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1134283 (ed) Proceedings of the international workshop on link discovery, ACM, pp 1–8
  2. Crane R, Sornette D (2008) Robust dynamic classes revealed by measuring the response function of a social system. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(41):15649–15653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Deschatres F, Sornette D (2005) Dynamics of book sales: endogenous versus exogenous shocks in complex networks. Phys Rev E 72(1):16112MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Egedsdal M, Fathauer C, Louie K, Neuman J (2010) Statistical and stochastic modeling of gang rivalries in Los Angeles. SIAM Undergrad Res Online 3(3):72–94Google Scholar
  5. Guo F, Hanneke S, Xing EP (2007) Recovering temporally rewiring networks : a model-based approach. In: Proceedings of the 24th international conference on machine learning. Corvallis, ORGoogle Scholar
  6. Hawkes AG (1971a) Spectra of some self-exciting and mutually exciting point processes. Biometrika 58(1):83MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hawkes AG (1971b) Spectra of some self-exciting and mutually exciting point processes. Biometrika 58(1):83MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hawkes AG, Oakes D (1974) A cluster process representation of a self-exciting process. J Appl Probab 11(3):493–503MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoff PD (2008) Multiplicative latent factor models for description and prediction of social networks. Comput Math Organ Theory 15(4):261–272Google Scholar
  10. Hoff PD, Raftery AE (2002) Latent space approaches to social network analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 97(460):1090–1098MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Johansen A, Sornette D (2000) Download relaxation dynamics on the WWW following newspaper publication of URL. Phys A: Stat Mech Appl 276(1–2):338–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kolar M, Song L, Ahmed A, Xing EP (2009) Estimating time-varying networks. Ann Appl Stat 4(1):1–33Google Scholar
  13. Krivitsky PN, Handcock MS (2008) Fitting latent position cluster models for social networks with latentnet. J Stat Softw 24(5):1–23Google Scholar
  14. Large J (2007) Measuring the resiliency of an electronic limit order book. J Financial Mark 10(1):1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Møller J, Rasmussen J (2005) Perfect simulation of Hawkes processes. Adv Appl Probab 37(3):629–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ogata Y (1981) On Lewis’ simulation method for point processes. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 27(1):23–31MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ogata Y (1988) Statistical models for earthquake occurrences and residual analysis for point processes. J Am Stat Assoc 83(401):9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ogata Y (1998) Space-time point-process models for earthquake occurrences. Ann Inst Stat Math 50(2): 379–402Google Scholar
  19. Ozaki T (1979) Maximum likelihood estimation of Hawkes’ self-exciting point processes. Ann Inst Stat Math 31(1):145–155MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sarkar P, Moore A (2005) Dynamic social network analysis using latent space models. ACM SIGKDD Explor Newsl 7(2):40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Snijders TAB (1996) Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change. J Math Sociol 21:149–172MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Snijders TAB, Nowicki K (1997) Estimation and prediction for stochastic blockmodels for graphs with latent block structure. J Classif 14(1):75–100MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Veen A, Schoenberg FP (2006) Estimation of space-time branching process models in seismology using an EM-Type algorithm. J Am Stat AssocGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhuang J, Ogata Y, Vere-Jones D (2002) Declustering of space-time earthquake occurrences. J Am Stat Assoc 97(458):369–380MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations