Noisy Labels Can Induce Good Representations

The current success of deep learning depends on large-scale labeled datasets. In practice, high-quality annotations are expensive to collect, but noisy annotations are more affordable. Previous works report mixed empirical results when training with noisy labels: neural networks can easily memorize random labels, but they can also generalize from noisy labels. To explain this puzzle, we study how architecture affects learning with noisy labels. We observe that if an architecture suits the task, training with noisy labels can induce useful hidden representations, even when the model generalizes poorly; i.e., the last few layers of the model are more negatively affected by noisy labels. This finding leads to a simple method to improve models trained on noisy labels: replacing the final dense layers with a linear model, whose weights are learned from a small set of clean data. We empirically validate our findings across three architectures (Convolutional Neural Networks, Graph Neural Networks, and Multi-Layer Perceptrons) and two domains (graph algorithmic tasks and image classification). Furthermore, we achieve state-of-the-art results on image classification benchmarks by combining our method with existing approaches on noisy label training.

How Neural Networks Extrapolate: From Feedforward to Graph Neural Networks

We study how neural networks trained by gradient descent extrapolate, i.e., what they learn outside the support of the training distribution. Previous works report mixed empirical results when extrapolating with neural networks: while feedforward neural networks, a.k.a. multilayer perceptrons (MLPs), do not extrapolate well in certain simple tasks, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) -- structured networks with MLP modules -- have shown some success in more complex tasks. Working towards a theoretical explanation, we identify conditions under which MLPs and GNNs extrapolate well. First, we quantify the observation that ReLU MLPs quickly converge to linear functions along any direction from the origin, which implies that ReLU MLPs do not extrapolate most nonlinear functions. But, they can provably learn a linear target function when the training distribution is sufficiently diverse. Second, in connection to analyzing the successes and limitations of GNNs, these results suggest a hypothesis for which we provide theoretical and empirical evidence: the success of GNNs in extrapolating algorithmic tasks to new data (e.g., larger graphs or edge weights) relies on encoding task-specific non-linearities in the architecture or features. Our theoretical analysis builds on a connection of over-parameterized networks to the neural tangent kernel. Empirically, our theory holds across different training settings.

What Can Neural Networks Reason About?

Neural networks have succeeded in many reasoning tasks. Empirically, these tasks require specialized network structures, e.g., Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) perform well on many such tasks, but less structured networks fail. Theoretically, there is limited understanding of why and when a network structure generalizes better than others, although they have equal expressive power. In this paper, we develop a framework to characterize which reasoning tasks a network can learn well, by studying how well its computation structure aligns with the algorithmic structure of the relevant reasoning process. We formally define this algorithmic alignment and derive a sample complexity bound that decreases with better alignment. This framework offers an explanation for the empirical success of popular reasoning models, and suggests their limitations. As an example, we unify seemingly different reasoning tasks, such as intuitive physics, visual question answering, and shortest paths, via the lens of a powerful algorithmic paradigm, dynamic programming (DP). We show that GNNs align with DP and thus are expected to solve these tasks. On several reasoning tasks, our theory is supported by empirical results.