No Arabic abstract
We present a general, efficient technique for providing contextual predictions that are multivalid in various senses, against an online sequence of adversarially chosen examples $(x,y)$. This means that the resulting estimates correctly predict various statistics of the labels $y$ not just marginally -- as averaged over the sequence of examples -- but also conditionally on $x in G$ for any $G$ belonging to an arbitrary intersecting collection of groups $mathcal{G}$. We provide three instantiations of this framework. The first is mean prediction, which corresponds to an online algorithm satisfying the notion of multicalibration from Hebert-Johnson et al. The second is variance and higher moment prediction, which corresponds to an online algorithm satisfying the notion of mean-conditioned moment multicalibration from Jung et al. Finally, we define a new notion of prediction interval multivalidity, and give an algorithm for finding prediction intervals which satisfy it. Because our algorithms handle adversarially chosen examples, they can equally well be used to predict statistics of the residuals of arbitrary point prediction methods, giving rise to very general techniques for quantifying the uncertainty of predictions of black box algorithms, even in an online adversarial setting. When instantiated for prediction intervals, this solves a similar problem as conformal prediction, but in an adversarial environment and with multivalidity guarantees stronger than simple marginal coverage guarantees.
Motivated by online decision-making in time-varying combinatorial environments, we study the problem of transforming offline algorithms to their online counterparts. We focus on offline combinatorial problems that are amenable to a constant factor approximation using a greedy algorithm that is robust to local errors. For such problems, we provide a general framework that efficiently transforms offline robust greedy algorithms to online ones using Blackwell approachability. We show that the resulting online algorithms have $O(sqrt{T})$ (approximate) regret under the full information setting. We further introduce a bandit extension of Blackwell approachability that we call Bandit Blackwell approachability. We leverage this notion to transform greedy robust offline algorithms into a $O(T^{2/3})$ (approximate) regret in the bandit setting. Demonstrating the flexibility of our framework, we apply our offline-to-online transformation to several problems at the intersection of revenue management, market design, and online optimization, including product ranking optimization in online platforms, reserve price optimization in auctions, and submodular maximization. We show that our transformation, when applied to these applications, leads to new regret bounds or improves the current known bounds.
Understanding model performance on unlabeled data is a fundamental challenge of developing, deploying, and maintaining AI systems. Model performance is typically evaluated using test sets or periodic manual quality assessments, both of which require laborious manual data labeling. Automated performance prediction techniques aim to mitigate this burden, but potential inaccuracy and a lack of trust in their predictions has prevented their widespread adoption. We address this core problem of performance prediction uncertainty with a method to compute prediction intervals for model performance. Our methodology uses transfer learning to train an uncertainty model to estimate the uncertainty of model performance predictions. We evaluate our approach across a wide range of drift conditions and show substantial improvement over competitive baselines. We believe this result makes prediction intervals, and performance prediction in general, significantly more practical for real-world use.
Motivated by settings in which predictive models may be required to be non-discriminatory with respect to certain attributes (such as race), but even collecting the sensitive attribute may be forbidden or restricted, we initiate the study of fair learning under the constraint of differential privacy. We design two learning algorithms that simultaneously promise differential privacy and equalized odds, a fairness condition that corresponds to equalizing false positive and negative rates across protected groups. Our first algorithm is a private implementation of the equalized odds post-processing approach of [Hardt et al., 2016]. This algorithm is appealingly simple, but must be able to use protected group membership explicitly at test time, which can be viewed as a form of disparate treatment. Our second algorithm is a differentially private version of the oracle-efficient in-processing approach of [Agarwal et al., 2018] that can be used to find the optimal fair classifier, given access to a subroutine that can solve the original (not necessarily fair) learning problem. This algorithm is more complex but need not have access to protected group membership at test time. We identify new tradeoffs between fairness, accuracy, and privacy that emerge only when requiring all three properties, and show that these tradeoffs can be milder if group membership may be used at test time. We conclude with a brief experimental evaluation.
Practical and pervasive needs for robustness and privacy in algorithms have inspired the design of online adversarial and differentially private learning algorithms. The primary quantity that characterizes learnability in these settings is the Littlestone dimension of the class of hypotheses [Ben-David et al., 2009, Alon et al., 2019]. This characterization is often interpreted as an impossibility result because classes such as linear thresholds and neural networks have infinite Littlestone dimension. In this paper, we apply the framework of smoothed analysis [Spielman and Teng, 2004], in which adversarially chosen inputs are perturbed slightly by nature. We show that fundamentally stronger regret and error guarantees are possible with smoothed adversaries than with worst-case adversaries. In particular, we obtain regret and privacy error bounds that depend only on the VC dimension and the bracketing number of a hypothesis class, and on the magnitudes of the perturbations.
In recent years, federated learning has been embraced as an approach for bringing about collaboration across large populations of learning agents. However, little is known about how collaboration protocols should take agents incentives into account when allocating individual resources for communal learning in order to maintain such collaborations. Inspired by game theoretic notions, this paper introduces a framework for incentive-aware learning and data sharing in federated learning. Our stable and envy-free equilibria capture notions of collaboration in the presence of agents interested in meeting their learning objectives while keeping their own sample collection burden low. For example, in an envy-free equilibrium, no agent would wish to swap their sampling burden with any other agent and in a stable equilibrium, no agent would wish to unilaterally reduce their sampling burden. In addition to formalizing this framework, our contributions include characterizing the structural properties of such equilibria, proving when they exist, and showing how they can be computed. Furthermore, we compare the sample complexity of incentive-aware collaboration with that of optimal collaboration when one ignores agents incentives.