论文检索

Theory/Miscellaneous Aspects of Machine Learning

Agustinus Kristiadi, Felix Dangel, Philipp Hennig

Model reparametrization, which follows the change-of-variable rule of calculus, is a popular way to improve the training of neural nets. But it can also be problematic since it can induce inconsistencies in, e.g., Hessian-based flatness measures, optimization trajectories, and modes of probability densities. This complicates downstream analyses: e.g. one cannot definitively relate flatness with generalization since arbitrary reparametrization changes their relationship. In this work, we study the invariance of neural nets under reparametrization from the perspective of Riemannian geometry. From this point of view, invariance is an inherent property of any neural net if one explicitly represents the metric and uses the correct associated transformation rules. This is important since although the metric is always present, it is often implicitly assumed as identity, and thus dropped from the notation, then lost under reparametrization. We discuss implications for measuring the flatness of minima, optimization, and for probability-density maximization. Finally, we explore some interesting directions where invariance is useful.

Theory/Miscellaneous Aspects of Machine Learning

Hossein Esfandiari, Amin Karbasi, Vahab Mirrokni, Grigoris Velegkas, Felix Zhou

We design replicable algorithms in the context of statistical clustering under the recently introduced notion of replicability from Impagliazzo et al. [2022]. According to this definition, a clustering algorithm is replicable if, with high probability, its output induces the exact same partition of the sample space after two executions on different inputs drawn from the same distribution, when its internal randomness is shared across the executions. We propose such algorithms for the statistical $k$-medians, statistical $k$-means, and statistical $k$-centers problems by utilizing approximation routines for their combinatorial counterparts in a black-box manner. In particular, we demonstrate a replicable $O(1)$-approximation algorithm for statistical Euclidean $k$-medians ($k$-means) with $\operatorname{poly}(d)$ sample complexity. We also describe an $O(1)$-approximation algorithm with an additional $O(1)$-additive error for statistical Euclidean $k$-centers, albeit with $\exp(d)$ sample complexity. In addition, we provide experiments on synthetic distributions in 2D using the $k$-means++ implementation from sklearn as a black-box that validate our theoretical results.

Theory/Miscellaneous Aspects of Machine Learning

Ryan Theisen, Hyunsuk Kim, Yaoqing Yang, Liam Hodgkinson, Michael Mahoney

Ensembling has a long history in statistical data analysis, with many impactful applications. However, in many modern machine learning settings, the benefits of ensembling are less ubiquitous and less obvious. We study, both theoretically and empirically, the fundamental question of when ensembling yields significant performance improvements in classification tasks. Theoretically, we prove new results relating the \emph{ensemble improvement rate} (a measure of how much ensembling decreases the error rate versus a single model, on a relative scale) to the \emph{disagreement-error ratio}. We show that ensembling improves performance significantly whenever the disagreement rate is large relative to the average error rate; and that, conversely, one classifier is often enough whenever the disagreement rate is low relative to the average error rate. On the way to proving these results, we derive, under a mild condition called \emph{competence}, improved upper and lower bounds on the average test error rate of the majority vote classifier.To complement this theory, we study ensembling empirically in a variety of settings, verifying the predictions made by our theory, and identifying practical scenarios where ensembling does and does not result in large performance improvements. Perhaps most notably, we demonstrate a distinct difference in behavior between interpolating models (popular in current practice) and non-interpolating models (such as tree-based methods, where ensembling is popular), demonstrating that ensembling helps considerably more in the latter case than in the former.

Theory/Miscellaneous Aspects of Machine Learning

Alicia Curth, Alan Jeffares, Mihaela van der Schaar

Conventional statistical wisdom established a well-understood relationship between model complexity and prediction error, typically presented as a _U-shaped curve_ reflecting a transition between under- and overfitting regimes. However, motivated by the success of overparametrized neural networks, recent influential work has suggested this theory to be generally incomplete, introducing an additional regime that exhibits a second descent in test error as the parameter count $p$ grows past sample size $n$ -- a phenomenon dubbed _double descent_. While most attention has naturally been given to the deep-learning setting, double descent was shown to emerge more generally across non-neural models: known cases include _linear regression, trees, and boosting_. In this work, we take a closer look at the evidence surrounding these more classical statistical machine learning methods and challenge the claim that observed cases of double descent truly extend the limits of a traditional U-shaped complexity-generalization curve therein. We show that once careful consideration is given to _what is being plotted_ on the x-axes of their double descent plots, it becomes apparent that there are implicitly multiple, distinct complexity axes along which the parameter count grows. We demonstrate that the second descent appears exactly (and _only_) when and where the transition between these underlying axes occurs, and that its location is thus _not_ inherently tied to the interpolation threshold $p=n$. We then gain further insight by adopting a classical nonparametric statistics perspective. We interpret the investigated methods as _smoothers_ and propose a generalized measure for the _effective_ number of parameters they use _on unseen examples_, using which we find that their apparent double descent curves do indeed fold back into more traditional convex shapes -- providing a resolution to the ostensible tension between double descent and traditional statistical intuition.