Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userSparsity-accuracy trade-off in MKL
170
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Ryota Tomioka
Publication date
2010
fields
Mathematical Statistics
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We empirically investigate the best trade-off between sparse and uniformly-weighted multiple kernel learning (MKL) using the elastic-net regularization on real and simulated datasets. We find that the best trade-off parameter depends not only on the sparsity of the true kernel-weight spectrum but also on the linear dependence among kernels and the number of samples.
rate research
Read More
We investigate the learning rate of multiple kernel learning (MKL) with $ell_1$ and elastic-net regularizations. The elastic-net regularization is a composition of an $ell_1$-regularizer for inducing the sparsity and an $ell_2$-regularizer for controlling the smoothness. We focus on a sparse setting where the total number of kernels is large, but the number of nonzero components of the ground truth is relatively small, and show sharper convergence rates than the learning rates have ever shown for both $ell_1$ and elastic-net regularizations. Our analysis reveals some relations between the choice of a regularization function and the performance. If the ground truth is smooth, we show a faster convergence rate for the elastic-net regularization with less conditions than $ell_1$-regularization; otherwise, a faster convergence rate for the $ell_1$-regularization is shown.
A trade-off between accuracy and fairness is almost taken as a given in the existing literature on fairness in machine learning. Yet, it is not preordained that accuracy should decrease with increased fairness. Novel to this work, we examine fair classification through the lens of mismatched hypothesis testing: trying to find a classifier that distinguishes between two ideal distributions when given two mismatched distributions that are biased. Using Chernoff information, a tool in information theory, we theoretically demonstrate that, contrary to popular belief, there always exist ideal distributions such that optimal fairness and accuracy (with respect to the ideal distributions) are achieved simultaneously: there is no trade-off. Moreover, the same classifier yields the lack of a trade-off with respect to ideal distributions while yielding a trade-off when accuracy is measured with respect to the given (possibly biased) dataset. To complement our main result, we formulate an optimization to find ideal distributions and derive fundamental limits to explain why a trade-off exists on the given biased dataset. We also derive conditions under which active data collection can alleviate the fairness-accuracy trade-off in the real world. Our results lead us to contend that it is problematic to measure accuracy with respect to data that reflects bias, and instead, we should be considering accuracy with respect to ideal, unbiased data.
Learning algorithms need bias to generalize and perform better than random guessing. We examine the flexibility (expressivity) of biased algorithms. An expressive algorithm can adapt to changing training data, altering its outcome based on changes in its input. We measure expressivity by using an information-theoretic notion of entropy on algorithm outcome distributions, demonstrating a trade-off between bias and expressivity. To the degree an algorithm is biased is the degree to which it can outperform uniform random sampling, but is also the degree to which is becomes inflexible. We derive bounds relating bias to expressivity, proving the necessary trade-offs inherent in trying to create strongly performing yet flexible algorithms.
We identify a trade-off between robustness and accuracy that serves as a guiding principle in the design of defenses against adversarial examples. Although this problem has been widely studied empirically, much remains unknown concerning the theory underlying this trade-off. In this work, we decompose the prediction error for adversarial examples (robust error) as the sum of the natural (classification) error and boundary error, and provide a differentiable upper bound using the theory of classification-calibrated loss, which is shown to be the tightest possible upper bound uniform over all probability distributions and measurable predictors. Inspired by our theoretical analysis, we also design a new defense method, TRADES, to trade adversarial robustness off against accuracy. Our proposed algorithm performs well experimentally in real-world datasets. The methodology is the foundation of our entry to the NeurIPS 2018 Adversarial Vision Challenge in which we won the 1st place out of ~2,000 submissions, surpassing the runner-up approach by $11.41%$ in terms of mean $ell_2$ perturbation distance.
Modern Monte Carlo-type approaches to dynamic decision problems are reformulated as empirical loss minimization, allowing direct applications of classical results from statistical machine learning. These computational methods are then analyzed in this framework to demonstrate their effectiveness as well as their susceptibility to generalization error. Standard uses of classical results prove potential overlearning, thus bias-variance trade-off, by connecting over-trained networks to anticipating controls. On the other hand, non-asymptotic estimates based on Rademacher complexity show the convergence of these algorithms for sufficiently large training sets. A numerically studied stylized example illustrates these possibilities, including the importance of problem dimension in the degree of overlearning, and the effectiveness of this approach.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
