Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userOn the Bias Against Inductive Biases
354
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
George Cazenavette V
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Borrowing from the transformer models that revolutionized the field of natural language processing, self-supervised feature learning for visual tasks has also seen state-of-the-art success using these extremely deep, isotropic networks. However, the typical AI researcher does not have the resources to evaluate, let alone train, a model with several billion parameters and quadratic self-attention activations. To facilitate further research, it is necessary to understand the features of these huge transformer models that can be adequately studied by the typical researcher. One interesting characteristic of these transformer models is that they remove most of the inductive biases present in classical convolutional networks. In this work, we analyze the effect of these and more inductive biases on small to moderately-sized isotropic networks used for unsupervised visual feature learning and show that their removal is not always ideal.
rate research
Read More
Transformers recently are adapted from the community of natural language processing as a promising substitute of convolution-based neural networks for visual learning tasks. However, its supremacy degenerates given an insufficient amount of training data (e.g., ImageNet). To make it into practical utility, we propose a novel distillation-based method to train vision transformers. Unlike previous works, where merely heavy convolution-based teachers are provided, we introduce lightweight teachers with different architectural inductive biases (e.g., convolution and involution) to co-advise the student transformer. The key is that teachers with different inductive biases attain different knowledge despite that they are trained on the same dataset, and such different knowledge compounds and boosts the students performance during distillation. Equipped with this cross inductive bias distillation method, our vision transformers (termed as CivT) outperform all previous transformers of the same architecture on ImageNet.
Convolutional architectures have proven extremely successful for vision tasks. Their hard inductive biases enable sample-efficient learning, but come at the cost of a potentially lower performance ceiling. Vision Transformers (ViTs) rely on more flexible self-attention layers, and have recently outperformed CNNs for image classification. However, they require costly pre-training on large external datasets or distillation from pre-trained convolutional networks. In this paper, we ask the following question: is it possible to combine the strengths of these two architectures while avoiding their respective limitations? To this end, we introduce gated positional self-attention (GPSA), a form of positional self-attention which can be equipped with a ``soft convolutional inductive bias. We initialise the GPSA layers to mimic the locality of convolutional layers, then give each attention head the freedom to escape locality by adjusting a gating parameter regulating the attention paid to position versus content information. The resulting convolutional-like ViT architecture, ConViT, outperforms the DeiT on ImageNet, while offering a much improved sample efficiency. We further investigate the role of locality in learning by first quantifying how it is encouraged in vanilla self-attention layers, then analysing how it is escaped in GPSA layers. We conclude by presenting various ablations to better understand the success of the ConViT. Our code and models are released publicly at https://github.com/facebookresearch/convit.
We investigate how to exploit structural similarities of an individuals potential outcomes (POs) under different treatments to obtain better estimates of conditional average treatment effects in finite samples. Especially when it is unknown whether a treatment has an effect at all, it is natural to hypothesize that the POs are similar - yet, some existing strategies for treatment effect estimation employ regularization schemes that implicitly encourage heterogeneity even when it does not exist and fail to fully make use of shared structure. In this paper, we investigate and compare three end-to-end learning strategies to overcome this problem - based on regularization, reparametrization and a flexible multi-task architecture - each encoding inductive bias favoring shared behavior across POs. To build understanding of their relative strengths, we implement all strategies using neural networks and conduct a wide range of semi-synthetic experiments. We observe that all three approaches can lead to substantial improvements upon numerous baselines and gain insight into performance differences across various experimental settings.
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.
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.
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
