Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTowards Error Measures which Influence a Learners Inductive Bias to the Ground Truth
56
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Amy Parkes Miss
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Artificial intelligence is applied in a range of sectors, and is relied upon for decisions requiring a high level of trust. For regression methods, trust is increased if they approximate the true input-output relationships and perform accurately outside the bounds of the training data. But often performance off-test-set is poor, especially when data is sparse. This is because the conditional average, which in many scenarios is a good approximation of the `ground truth, is only modelled with conventional Minkowski-r error measures when the data set adheres to restrictive assumptions, with many real data sets violating these. To combat this there are several methods that use prior knowledge to approximate the `ground truth. However, prior knowledge is not always available, and this paper investigates how error measures affect the ability for a regression method to model the `ground truth in these scenarios. Current error measures are shown to create an unhelpful bias and a new error measure is derived which does not exhibit this behaviour. This is tested on 36 representative data sets with different characteristics, showing that it is more consistent in determining the `ground truth and in giving improved predictions in regions beyond the range of the training data.
rate research
Read More
In data science, there is a long history of using synthetic data for method development, feature selection and feature engineering. Our current interest in synthetic data comes from recent work in explainability. Todays datasets are typically larger and more complex - requiring less interpretable models. In the setting of textit{post hoc} explainability, there is no ground truth for explanations. Inspired by recent work in explaining image classifiers that does provide ground truth, we propose a similar solution for tabular data. Using copulas, a concise specification of the desired statistical properties of a dataset, users can build intuition around explainability using controlled data sets and experimentation. The current capabilities are demonstrated on three use cases: one dimensional logistic regression, impact of correlation from informative features, impact of correlation from redundant variables.
Dropout is a simple but effective technique for learning in neural networks and other settings. A sound theoretical understanding of dropout is needed to determine when dropout should be applied and how to use it most effectively. In this paper we continue the exploration of dropout as a regularizer pioneered by Wager, et.al. We focus on linear classification where a convex proxy to the misclassification loss (i.e. the logistic loss used in logistic regression) is minimized. We show: (a) when the dropout-regularized criterion has a unique minimizer, (b) when the dropout-regularization penalty goes to infinity with the weights, and when it remains bounded, (c) that the dropout regularization can be non-monotonic as individual weights increase from 0, and (d) that the dropout regularization penalty may not be convex. This last point is particularly surprising because the combination of dropout regularization with any convex loss proxy is always a convex function. In order to contrast dropout regularization with $L_2$ regularization, we formalize the notion of when different sources are more compatible with different regularizers. We then exhibit distributions that are provably more compatible with dropout regularization than $L_2$ regularization, and vice versa. These sources provide additional insight into how the inductive biases of dropout and $L_2$ regularization differ. We provide some similar results for $L_1$ regularization.
We study learners (computable devices) inferring formal languages, a setting referred to as language learning in the limit or inductive inference. In particular, we require the learners we investigate to be witness-based, that is, to justify each of their mind changes. Besides being a natural requirement for a learning task, this restriction deserves special attention as it is a specialization of various important learning paradigms. In particular, with the help of witness-based learning, explanatory learners are shown to be equally powerful under these seemingly incomparable paradigms. Nonetheless, until now, witness-based learners have only been studied sparsely. In this work, we conduct a thorough study of these learners both when requiring syntactic and semantic convergence and obtain normal forms thereof. In the former setting, we extend known results such that they include witness-based learning and generalize these to hold for a variety of learners. Transitioning to behaviourally correct learning, we also provide normal forms for semantically witness-based learners. Most notably, we show that set-driven globally semantically witness-based learners are equally powerful as their Gold-style semantically conservative counterpart. Such results are key to understanding the, yet undiscovered, mutual relation between various important learning paradigms when learning behaviourally correctly.
While designing inductive bias in neural architectures has been widely studied, we hypothesize that transformer networks are flexible enough to learn inductive bias from suitable generic tasks. Here, we replace architecture engineering by encoding inductive bias in the form of datasets. Inspired by Peirces view that deduction, induction, and abduction form an irreducible set of reasoning primitives, we design three synthetic tasks that are intended to require the model to have these three abilities. We specifically design these synthetic tasks in a way that they are devoid of mathematical knowledge to ensure that only the fundamental reasoning biases can be learned from these tasks. This defines a new pre-training methodology called LIME (Learning Inductive bias for Mathematical rEasoning). Models trained with LIME significantly outperform vanilla transformers on three very different large mathematical reasoning benchmarks. Unlike dominating the computation cost as traditional pre-training approaches, LIME requires only a small fraction of the computation cost of the typical downstream task.
For many evaluation metrics commonly used as benchmarks for unconditional image generation, trivially memorizing the training set attains a better score than models which are considered state-of-the-art; we consider this problematic. We clarify a necessary condition for an evaluation metric not to behave this way: estimating the function must require a large sample from the model. In search of such a metric, we turn to neural network divergences (NNDs), which are defined in terms of a neural network trained to distinguish between distributions. The resulting benchmarks cannot be won by training set memorization, while still being perceptually correlated and computable only from samples. We survey past work on using NNDs for evaluation and implement an example black-box metric based on these ideas. Through experimental validation we show that it can effectively measure diversity, sample quality, and generalization.
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
