Role of Locality and Weight Sharing in Image-Based Tasks: A Sample Complexity Separation between CNNs, LCNs, and FCNs
Authors:
Aakash Lahoti,
Stefani Karp,
Ezra Winston,
Aarti Singh,
Yuanzhi Li
Abstract:
Vision tasks are characterized by the properties of locality and translation invariance. The superior performance of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on these tasks is widely attributed to the inductive bias of locality and weight sharing baked into their architecture. Existing attempts to quantify the statistical benefits of these biases in CNNs over locally connected convolutional neural net…
▽ More
Vision tasks are characterized by the properties of locality and translation invariance. The superior performance of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on these tasks is widely attributed to the inductive bias of locality and weight sharing baked into their architecture. Existing attempts to quantify the statistical benefits of these biases in CNNs over locally connected convolutional neural networks (LCNs) and fully connected neural networks (FCNs) fall into one of the following categories: either they disregard the optimizer and only provide uniform convergence upper bounds with no separating lower bounds, or they consider simplistic tasks that do not truly mirror the locality and translation invariance as found in real-world vision tasks. To address these deficiencies, we introduce the Dynamic Signal Distribution (DSD) classification task that models an image as consisting of $k$ patches, each of dimension $d$, and the label is determined by a $d$-sparse signal vector that can freely appear in any one of the $k$ patches. On this task, for any orthogonally equivariant algorithm like gradient descent, we prove that CNNs require $\tilde{O}(k+d)$ samples, whereas LCNs require $Ω(kd)$ samples, establishing the statistical advantages of weight sharing in translation invariant tasks. Furthermore, LCNs need $\tilde{O}(k(k+d))$ samples, compared to $Ω(k^2d)$ samples for FCNs, showcasing the benefits of locality in local tasks. Additionally, we develop information theoretic tools for analyzing randomized algorithms, which may be of interest for statistical research.
△ Less
Submitted 22 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
Sharpened Lazy Incremental Quasi-Newton Method
Authors:
Aakash Lahoti,
Spandan Senapati,
Ketan Rajawat,
Alec Koppel
Abstract:
The problem of minimizing the sum of $n$ functions in $d$ dimensions is ubiquitous in machine learning and statistics. In many applications where the number of observations $n$ is large, it is necessary to use incremental or stochastic methods, as their per-iteration cost is independent of $n$. Of these, Quasi-Newton (QN) methods strike a balance between the per-iteration cost and the convergence…
▽ More
The problem of minimizing the sum of $n$ functions in $d$ dimensions is ubiquitous in machine learning and statistics. In many applications where the number of observations $n$ is large, it is necessary to use incremental or stochastic methods, as their per-iteration cost is independent of $n$. Of these, Quasi-Newton (QN) methods strike a balance between the per-iteration cost and the convergence rate. Specifically, they exhibit a superlinear rate with $O(d^2)$ cost in contrast to the linear rate of first-order methods with $O(d)$ cost and the quadratic rate of second-order methods with $O(d^3)$ cost. However, existing incremental methods have notable shortcomings: Incremental Quasi-Newton (IQN) only exhibits asymptotic superlinear convergence. In contrast, Incremental Greedy BFGS (IGS) offers explicit superlinear convergence but suffers from poor empirical performance and has a per-iteration cost of $O(d^3)$. To address these issues, we introduce the Sharpened Lazy Incremental Quasi-Newton Method (SLIQN) that achieves the best of both worlds: an explicit superlinear convergence rate, and superior empirical performance at a per-iteration $O(d^2)$ cost. SLIQN features two key changes: first, it incorporates a hybrid strategy of using both classic and greedy BFGS updates, allowing it to empirically outperform both IQN and IGS. Second, it employs a clever constant multiplicative factor along with a lazy propagation strategy, which enables it to have a cost of $O(d^2)$. Additionally, our experiments demonstrate the superiority of SLIQN over other incremental and stochastic Quasi-Newton variants and establish its competitiveness with second-order incremental methods.
△ Less
Submitted 12 March, 2024; v1 submitted 26 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
