Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userNeural Complexity Measures
201
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
While various complexity measures for deep neural networks exist, specifying an appropriate measure capable of predicting and explaining generalization in deep networks has proven challenging. We propose Neural Complexity (NC), a meta-learning framework for predicting generalization. Our model learns a scalar complexity measure through interactions with many heterogeneous tasks in a data-driven way. The trained NC model can be added to the standard training loss to regularize any task learner in a standard supervised learning scenario. We contrast NCs approach against existing manually-designed complexity measures and other meta-learning models, and we validate NCs performance on multiple regression and classification tasks
rate research
Read More
We consider functions defined by deep neural networks as definable objects in an o-miminal expansion of the real field, and derive an almost linear (in the number of weights) bound on sample complexity of such networks.
In seeking for sparse and efficient neural network models, many previous works investigated on enforcing L1 or L0 regularizers to encourage weight sparsity during training. The L0 regularizer measures the parameter sparsity directly and is invariant to the scaling of parameter values, but it cannot provide useful gradients, and therefore requires complex optimization techniques. The L1 regularizer is almost everywhere differentiable and can be easily optimized with gradient descent. Yet it is not scale-invariant, causing the same shrinking rate to all parameters, which is inefficient in increasing sparsity. Inspired by the Hoyer measure (the ratio between L1 and L2 norms) used in traditional compressed sensing problems, we present DeepHoyer, a set of sparsity-inducing regularizers that are both differentiable almost everywhere and scale-invariant. Our experiments show that enforcing DeepHoyer regularizers can produce even sparser neural network models than previous works, under the same accuracy level. We also show that DeepHoyer can be applied to both element-wise and structural pruning.
We describe a method that infers whether statistical dependences between two observed variables X and Y are due to a direct causal link or only due to a connecting causal path that contains an unobserved variable of low complexity, e.g., a binary variable. This problem is motivated by statistical genetics. Given a genetic marker that is correlated with a phenotype of interest, we want to detect whether this marker is causal or it only correlates with a causal one. Our method is based on the analysis of the location of the conditional distributions P(Y|x) in the simplex of all distributions of Y. We report encouraging results on semi-empirical data.
One of the principal scientific challenges in deep learning is explaining generalization, i.e., why the particular way the community now trains networks to achieve small training error also leads to small error on held-out data from the same population. It is widely appreciated that some worst-case theories -- such as those based on the VC dimension of the class of predictors induced by modern neural network architectures -- are unable to explain empirical performance. A large volume of work aims to close this gap, primarily by developing bounds on generalization error, optimization error, and excess risk. When evaluated empirically, however, most of these bounds are numerically vacuous. Focusing on generalization bounds, this work addresses the question of how to evaluate such bounds empirically. Jiang et al. (2020) recently described a large-scale empirical study aimed at uncovering potential causal relationships between bounds/measures and generalization. Building on their study, we highlight where their proposed methods can obscure failures and successes of generalization measures in explaining generalization. We argue that generalization measures should instead be evaluated within the framework of distributional robustness.
Generalization of deep networks has been of great interest in recent years, resulting in a number of theoretically and empirically motivated complexity measures. However, most papers proposing such measures study only a small set of models, leaving open the question of whether the conclusion drawn from those experiments would remain valid in other settings. We present the first large scale study of generalization in deep networks. We investigate more then 40 complexity measures taken from both theoretical bounds and empirical studies. We train over 10,000 convolutional networks by systematically varying commonly used hyperparameters. Hoping to uncover potentially causal relationships between each measure and generalization, we analyze carefully controlled experiments and show surprising failures of some measures as well as promising measures for further research.
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
