Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDiscovering Symbolic Models from Deep Learning with Inductive Biases
81
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We develop a general approach to distill symbolic representations of a learned deep model by introducing strong inductive biases. We focus on Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). The technique works as follows: we first encourage sparse latent representations when we train a GNN in a supervised setting, then we apply symbolic regression to components of the learned model to extract explicit physical relations. We find the correct known equations, including force laws and Hamiltonians, can be extracted from the neural network. We then apply our method to a non-trivial cosmology example-a detailed dark matter simulation-and discover a new analytic formula which can predict the concentration of dark matter from the mass distribution of nearby cosmic structures. The symbolic expressions extracted from the GNN using our technique also generalized to out-of-distribution data better than the GNN itself. Our approach offers alternative directions for interpreting neural networks and discovering novel physical principles from the representations they learn.
rate research
Read More
Many deep reinforcement learning algorithms contain inductive biases that sculpt the agents objective and its interface to the environment. These inductive biases can take many forms, including domain knowledge and pretuned hyper-parameters. In general, there is a trade-off between generality and performance when algorithms use such biases. Stronger biases can lead to faster learning, but weaker biases can potentially lead to more general algorithms. This trade-off is important because inductive biases are not free; substantial effort may be required to obtain relevant domain knowledge or to tune hyper-parameters effectively. In this paper, we re-examine several domain-specific components that bias the objective and the environmental interface of common deep reinforcement learning agents. We investigated whether the performance deteriorates when these components are replaced with adaptive solutions from the literature. In our experiments, performance sometimes decreased with the adaptive components, as one might expect when comparing to components crafted for the domain, but sometimes the adaptive components performed better. We investigated the main benefit of having fewer domain-specific components, by comparing the learning performance of the two systems on a different set of continuous control problems, without additional tuning of either system. As hypothesized, the system with adaptive components performed better on many of the new tasks.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has undergone a renaissance recently, making major progress in key domains such as vision, language, control, and decision-making. This has been due, in part, to cheap data and cheap compute resources, which have fit the natural strengths of deep learning. However, many defining characteristics of human intelligence, which developed under much different pressures, remain out of reach for current approaches. In particular, generalizing beyond ones experiences--a hallmark of human intelligence from infancy--remains a formidable challenge for modern AI. The following is part position paper, part review, and part unification. We argue that combinatorial generalization must be a top priority for AI to achieve human-like abilities, and that structured representations and computations are key to realizing this objective. Just as biology uses nature and nurture cooperatively, we reject the false choice between hand-engineering and end-to-end learning, and instead advocate for an approach which benefits from their complementary strengths. We explore how using relational inductive biases within deep learning architectures can facilitate learning about entities, relations, and rules for composing them. We present a new building block for the AI toolkit with a strong relational inductive bias--the graph network--which generalizes and extends various approaches for neural networks that operate on graphs, and provides a straightforward interface for manipulating structured knowledge and producing structured behaviors. We discuss how graph networks can support relational reasoning and combinatorial generalization, laying the foundation for more sophisticated, interpretable, and flexible patterns of reasoning. As a companion to this paper, we have released an open-source software library for building graph networks, with demonstrations of how to use them in practice.
Although reinforcement learning has been successfully applied in many domains in recent years, we still lack agents that can systematically generalize. While relational inductive biases that fit a task can improve generalization of RL agents, these biases are commonly hard-coded directly in the agents neural architecture. In this work, we show that we can incorporate relational inductive biases, encoded in the form of relational graphs, into agents. Based on this insight, we propose Grid-to-Graph (GTG), a mapping from grid structures to relational graphs that carry useful spatial relational inductive biases when processed through a Relational Graph Convolution Network (R-GCN). We show that, with GTG, R-GCNs generalize better both in terms of in-distribution and out-of-distribution compared to baselines based on Convolutional Neural Networks and Neural Logic Machines on challenging procedurally generated environments and MinAtar. Furthermore, we show that GTG produces agents that can jointly reason over observations and environment dynamics encoded in knowledge bases.
We show that a single softmax neural net with minimal changes can beat the uncertainty predictions of Deep Ensembles and other more complex single-forward-pass uncertainty approaches. Standard softmax neural nets suffer from feature collapse and extrapolate arbitrarily for OoD points. This results in arbitrary softmax entropies for OoD points which can have high entropy, low, or anything in between, thus cannot capture epistemic uncertainty reliably. We prove that this failure lies at the core of why Deep Ensemble Uncertainty works well. Instead of using softmax entropy, we show that with appropriate inductive biases softmax neural nets trained with maximum likelihood reliably capture epistemic uncertainty through their feature-space density. This density is obtained using simple Gaussian Discriminant Analysis, but it cannot represent aleatoric uncertainty reliably. We show that it is necessary to combine feature-space density with softmax entropy to disentangle uncertainties well. We evaluate the epistemic uncertainty quality on active learning and OoD detection, achieving SOTA ~98 AUROC on CIFAR-10 vs SVHN without fine-tuning on OoD data.
Supervised learning models often make systematic errors on rare subsets of the data. However, such systematic errors can be difficult to identify, as model performance can only be broken down across sensitive groups when these groups are known and explicitly labelled. This paper introduces a method for discovering systematic errors, which we call the spotlight. The key idea is that similar inputs tend to have similar representations in the final hidden layer of a neural network. We leverage this structure by shining a spotlight on this representation space to find contiguous regions where the model performs poorly. We show that the spotlight surfaces semantically meaningful areas of weakness in a wide variety of model architectures, including image classifiers, language models, and recommender systems.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
