-
Step-by-Step Diffusion: An Elementary Tutorial
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Arwen Bradley,
Hattie Zhou,
Madhu Advani
Abstract:
We present an accessible first course on diffusion models and flow matching for machine learning, aimed at a technical audience with no diffusion experience. We try to simplify the mathematical details as much as possible (sometimes heuristically), while retaining enough precision to derive correct algorithms.
We present an accessible first course on diffusion models and flow matching for machine learning, aimed at a technical audience with no diffusion experience. We try to simplify the mathematical details as much as possible (sometimes heuristically), while retaining enough precision to derive correct algorithms.
△ Less
Submitted 23 June, 2024; v1 submitted 13 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Vanishing Gradients in Reinforcement Finetuning of Language Models
Authors:
Noam Razin,
Hattie Zhou,
Omid Saremi,
Vimal Thilak,
Arwen Bradley,
Preetum Nakkiran,
Joshua Susskind,
Etai Littwin
Abstract:
Pretrained language models are commonly aligned with human preferences and downstream tasks via reinforcement finetuning (RFT), which refers to maximizing a (possibly learned) reward function using policy gradient algorithms. This work identifies a fundamental optimization obstacle in RFT: we prove that the expected gradient for an input vanishes when its reward standard deviation under the model…
▽ More
Pretrained language models are commonly aligned with human preferences and downstream tasks via reinforcement finetuning (RFT), which refers to maximizing a (possibly learned) reward function using policy gradient algorithms. This work identifies a fundamental optimization obstacle in RFT: we prove that the expected gradient for an input vanishes when its reward standard deviation under the model is small, even if the expected reward is far from optimal. Through experiments on an RFT benchmark and controlled environments, as well as a theoretical analysis, we then demonstrate that vanishing gradients due to small reward standard deviation are prevalent and detrimental, leading to extremely slow reward maximization. Lastly, we explore ways to overcome vanishing gradients in RFT. We find the common practice of an initial supervised finetuning (SFT) phase to be the most promising candidate, which sheds light on its importance in an RFT pipeline. Moreover, we show that a relatively small number of SFT optimization steps on as few as 1% of the input samples can suffice, indicating that the initial SFT phase need not be expensive in terms of compute and data labeling efforts. Overall, our results emphasize that being mindful for inputs whose expected gradient vanishes, as measured by the reward standard deviation, is crucial for successful execution of RFT.
△ Less
Submitted 14 March, 2024; v1 submitted 31 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
What Algorithms can Transformers Learn? A Study in Length Generalization
Authors:
Hattie Zhou,
Arwen Bradley,
Etai Littwin,
Noam Razin,
Omid Saremi,
Josh Susskind,
Samy Bengio,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Large language models exhibit surprising emergent generalization properties, yet also struggle on many simple reasoning tasks such as arithmetic and parity. This raises the question of if and when Transformer models can learn the true algorithm for solving a task. We study the scope of Transformers' abilities in the specific setting of length generalization on algorithmic tasks. Here, we propose a…
▽ More
Large language models exhibit surprising emergent generalization properties, yet also struggle on many simple reasoning tasks such as arithmetic and parity. This raises the question of if and when Transformer models can learn the true algorithm for solving a task. We study the scope of Transformers' abilities in the specific setting of length generalization on algorithmic tasks. Here, we propose a unifying framework to understand when and how Transformers can exhibit strong length generalization on a given task. Specifically, we leverage RASP (Weiss et al., 2021) -- a programming language designed for the computational model of a Transformer -- and introduce the RASP-Generalization Conjecture: Transformers tend to length generalize on a task if the task can be solved by a short RASP program which works for all input lengths. This simple conjecture remarkably captures most known instances of length generalization on algorithmic tasks. Moreover, we leverage our insights to drastically improve generalization performance on traditionally hard tasks (such as parity and addition). On the theoretical side, we give a simple example where the "min-degree-interpolator" model of learning from Abbe et al. (2023) does not correctly predict Transformers' out-of-distribution behavior, but our conjecture does. Overall, our work provides a novel perspective on the mechanisms of compositional generalization and the algorithmic capabilities of Transformers.
△ Less
Submitted 24 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
When Does Optimizing a Proper Loss Yield Calibration?
Authors:
Jarosław Błasiok,
Parikshit Gopalan,
Lunjia Hu,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Optimizing proper loss functions is popularly believed to yield predictors with good calibration properties; the intuition being that for such losses, the global optimum is to predict the ground-truth probabilities, which is indeed calibrated. However, typical machine learning models are trained to approximately minimize loss over restricted families of predictors, that are unlikely to contain the…
▽ More
Optimizing proper loss functions is popularly believed to yield predictors with good calibration properties; the intuition being that for such losses, the global optimum is to predict the ground-truth probabilities, which is indeed calibrated. However, typical machine learning models are trained to approximately minimize loss over restricted families of predictors, that are unlikely to contain the ground truth. Under what circumstances does optimizing proper loss over a restricted family yield calibrated models? What precise calibration guarantees does it give? In this work, we provide a rigorous answer to these questions. We replace the global optimality with a local optimality condition stipulating that the (proper) loss of the predictor cannot be reduced much by post-processing its predictions with a certain family of Lipschitz functions. We show that any predictor with this local optimality satisfies smooth calibration as defined in Kakade-Foster (2008), Błasiok et al. (2023). Local optimality is plausibly satisfied by well-trained DNNs, which suggests an explanation for why they are calibrated from proper loss minimization alone. Finally, we show that the connection between local optimality and calibration error goes both ways: nearly calibrated predictors are also nearly locally optimal.
△ Less
Submitted 8 December, 2023; v1 submitted 30 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Loss Minimization Yields Multicalibration for Large Neural Networks
Authors:
Jarosław Błasiok,
Parikshit Gopalan,
Lunjia Hu,
Adam Tauman Kalai,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Multicalibration is a notion of fairness for predictors that requires them to provide calibrated predictions across a large set of protected groups. Multicalibration is known to be a distinct goal than loss minimization, even for simple predictors such as linear functions.
In this work, we consider the setting where the protected groups can be represented by neural networks of size $k$, and the…
▽ More
Multicalibration is a notion of fairness for predictors that requires them to provide calibrated predictions across a large set of protected groups. Multicalibration is known to be a distinct goal than loss minimization, even for simple predictors such as linear functions.
In this work, we consider the setting where the protected groups can be represented by neural networks of size $k$, and the predictors are neural networks of size $n > k$. We show that minimizing the squared loss over all neural nets of size $n$ implies multicalibration for all but a bounded number of unlucky values of $n$. We also give evidence that our bound on the number of unlucky values is tight, given our proof technique. Previously, results of the flavor that loss minimization yields multicalibration were known only for predictors that were near the ground truth, hence were rather limited in applicability. Unlike these, our results rely on the expressivity of neural nets and utilize the representation of the predictor.
△ Less
Submitted 7 December, 2023; v1 submitted 19 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
The Calibration Generalization Gap
Authors:
A. Michael Carrell,
Neil Mallinar,
James Lucas,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Calibration is a fundamental property of a good predictive model: it requires that the model predicts correctly in proportion to its confidence. Modern neural networks, however, provide no strong guarantees on their calibration -- and can be either poorly calibrated or well-calibrated depending on the setting. It is currently unclear which factors contribute to good calibration (architecture, data…
▽ More
Calibration is a fundamental property of a good predictive model: it requires that the model predicts correctly in proportion to its confidence. Modern neural networks, however, provide no strong guarantees on their calibration -- and can be either poorly calibrated or well-calibrated depending on the setting. It is currently unclear which factors contribute to good calibration (architecture, data augmentation, overparameterization, etc), though various claims exist in the literature.
We propose a systematic way to study the calibration error: by decomposing it into (1) calibration error on the train set, and (2) the calibration generalization gap. This mirrors the fundamental decomposition of generalization. We then investigate each of these terms, and give empirical evidence that (1) DNNs are typically always calibrated on their train set, and (2) the calibration generalization gap is upper-bounded by the standard generalization gap. Taken together, this implies that models with small generalization gap (|Test Error - Train Error|) are well-calibrated. This perspective unifies many results in the literature, and suggests that interventions which reduce the generalization gap (such as adding data, using heavy augmentation, or smaller model size) also improve calibration. We thus hope our initial study lays the groundwork for a more systematic and comprehensive understanding of the relation between calibration, generalization, and optimization.
△ Less
Submitted 6 October, 2022; v1 submitted 4 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
-
Benign, Tempered, or Catastrophic: A Taxonomy of Overfitting
Authors:
Neil Mallinar,
James B. Simon,
Amirhesam Abedsoltan,
Parthe Pandit,
Mikhail Belkin,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
The practical success of overparameterized neural networks has motivated the recent scientific study of interpolating methods, which perfectly fit their training data. Certain interpolating methods, including neural networks, can fit noisy training data without catastrophically bad test performance, in defiance of standard intuitions from statistical learning theory. Aiming to explain this, a body…
▽ More
The practical success of overparameterized neural networks has motivated the recent scientific study of interpolating methods, which perfectly fit their training data. Certain interpolating methods, including neural networks, can fit noisy training data without catastrophically bad test performance, in defiance of standard intuitions from statistical learning theory. Aiming to explain this, a body of recent work has studied benign overfitting, a phenomenon where some interpolating methods approach Bayes optimality, even in the presence of noise. In this work we argue that while benign overfitting has been instructive and fruitful to study, many real interpolating methods like neural networks do not fit benignly: modest noise in the training set causes nonzero (but non-infinite) excess risk at test time, implying these models are neither benign nor catastrophic but rather fall in an intermediate regime. We call this intermediate regime tempered overfitting, and we initiate its systematic study. We first explore this phenomenon in the context of kernel (ridge) regression (KR) by obtaining conditions on the ridge parameter and kernel eigenspectrum under which KR exhibits each of the three behaviors. We find that kernels with powerlaw spectra, including Laplace kernels and ReLU neural tangent kernels, exhibit tempered overfitting. We then empirically study deep neural networks through the lens of our taxonomy, and find that those trained to interpolation are tempered, while those stopped early are benign. We hope our work leads to a more refined understanding of overfitting in modern learning.
△ Less
Submitted 20 October, 2022; v1 submitted 13 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
-
What You See is What You Get: Principled Deep Learning via Distributional Generalization
Authors:
Bogdan Kulynych,
Yao-Yuan Yang,
Yaodong Yu,
Jarosław Błasiok,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Having similar behavior at training time and test time $-$ what we call a "What You See Is What You Get" (WYSIWYG) property $-$ is desirable in machine learning. Models trained with standard stochastic gradient descent (SGD), however, do not necessarily have this property, as their complex behaviors such as robustness or subgroup performance can differ drastically between training and test time. I…
▽ More
Having similar behavior at training time and test time $-$ what we call a "What You See Is What You Get" (WYSIWYG) property $-$ is desirable in machine learning. Models trained with standard stochastic gradient descent (SGD), however, do not necessarily have this property, as their complex behaviors such as robustness or subgroup performance can differ drastically between training and test time. In contrast, we show that Differentially-Private (DP) training provably ensures the high-level WYSIWYG property, which we quantify using a notion of distributional generalization. Applying this connection, we introduce new conceptual tools for designing deep-learning methods by reducing generalization concerns to optimization ones: to mitigate unwanted behavior at test time, it is provably sufficient to mitigate this behavior on the training data. By applying this novel design principle, which bypasses "pathologies" of SGD, we construct simple algorithms that are competitive with SOTA in several distributional-robustness applications, significantly improve the privacy vs. disparate impact trade-off of DP-SGD, and mitigate robust overfitting in adversarial training. Finally, we also improve on theoretical bounds relating DP, stability, and distributional generalization.
△ Less
Submitted 17 October, 2022; v1 submitted 7 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Knowledge Distillation: Bad Models Can Be Good Role Models
Authors:
Gal Kaplun,
Eran Malach,
Preetum Nakkiran,
Shai Shalev-Shwartz
Abstract:
Large neural networks trained in the overparameterized regime are able to fit noise to zero train error. Recent work \citep{nakkiran2020distributional} has empirically observed that such networks behave as "conditional samplers" from the noisy distribution. That is, they replicate the noise in the train data to unseen examples. We give a theoretical framework for studying this conditional sampling…
▽ More
Large neural networks trained in the overparameterized regime are able to fit noise to zero train error. Recent work \citep{nakkiran2020distributional} has empirically observed that such networks behave as "conditional samplers" from the noisy distribution. That is, they replicate the noise in the train data to unseen examples. We give a theoretical framework for studying this conditional sampling behavior in the context of learning theory. We relate the notion of such samplers to knowledge distillation, where a student network imitates the outputs of a teacher on unlabeled data. We show that samplers, while being bad classifiers, can be good teachers. Concretely, we prove that distillation from samplers is guaranteed to produce a student which approximates the Bayes optimal classifier. Finally, we show that some common learning algorithms (e.g., Nearest-Neighbours and Kernel Machines) can generate samplers when applied in the overparameterized regime.
△ Less
Submitted 28 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
-
Deconstructing Distributions: A Pointwise Framework of Learning
Authors:
Gal Kaplun,
Nikhil Ghosh,
Saurabh Garg,
Boaz Barak,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
In machine learning, we traditionally evaluate the performance of a single model, averaged over a collection of test inputs. In this work, we propose a new approach: we measure the performance of a collection of models when evaluated on a $\textit{single input point}$. Specifically, we study a point's $\textit{profile}$: the relationship between models' average performance on the test distribution…
▽ More
In machine learning, we traditionally evaluate the performance of a single model, averaged over a collection of test inputs. In this work, we propose a new approach: we measure the performance of a collection of models when evaluated on a $\textit{single input point}$. Specifically, we study a point's $\textit{profile}$: the relationship between models' average performance on the test distribution and their pointwise performance on this individual point. We find that profiles can yield new insights into the structure of both models and data -- in and out-of-distribution. For example, we empirically show that real data distributions consist of points with qualitatively different profiles. On one hand, there are "compatible" points with strong correlation between the pointwise and average performance. On the other hand, there are points with weak and even $\textit{negative}$ correlation: cases where improving overall model accuracy actually $\textit{hurts}$ performance on these inputs. We prove that these experimental observations are inconsistent with the predictions of several simplified models of learning proposed in prior work. As an application, we use profiles to construct a dataset we call CIFAR-10-NEG: a subset of CINIC-10 such that for standard models, accuracy on CIFAR-10-NEG is $\textit{negatively correlated}$ with accuracy on CIFAR-10 test. This illustrates, for the first time, an OOD dataset that completely inverts "accuracy-on-the-line" (Miller, Taori, Raghunathan, Sagawa, Koh, Shankar, Liang, Carmon, and Schmidt 2021)
△ Less
Submitted 7 June, 2022; v1 submitted 20 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
Limitations of Neural Collapse for Understanding Generalization in Deep Learning
Authors:
Like Hui,
Mikhail Belkin,
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
The recent work of Papyan, Han, & Donoho (2020) presented an intriguing "Neural Collapse" phenomenon, showing a structural property of interpolating classifiers in the late stage of training. This opened a rich area of exploration studying this phenomenon. Our motivation is to study the upper limits of this research program: How far will understanding Neural Collapse take us in understanding deep…
▽ More
The recent work of Papyan, Han, & Donoho (2020) presented an intriguing "Neural Collapse" phenomenon, showing a structural property of interpolating classifiers in the late stage of training. This opened a rich area of exploration studying this phenomenon. Our motivation is to study the upper limits of this research program: How far will understanding Neural Collapse take us in understanding deep learning? First, we investigate its role in generalization. We refine the Neural Collapse conjecture into two separate conjectures: collapse on the train set (an optimization property) and collapse on the test distribution (a generalization property). We find that while Neural Collapse often occurs on the train set, it does not occur on the test set. We thus conclude that Neural Collapse is primarily an optimization phenomenon, with as-yet-unclear connections to generalization. Second, we investigate the role of Neural Collapse in feature learning. We show simple, realistic experiments where training longer leads to worse last-layer features, as measured by transfer-performance on a downstream task. This suggests that neural collapse is not always desirable for representation learning, as previously claimed. Finally, we give preliminary evidence of a "cascading collapse" phenomenon, wherein some form of Neural Collapse occurs not only for the last layer, but in earlier layers as well. We hope our work encourages the community to continue the rich line of Neural Collapse research, while also considering its inherent limitations.
△ Less
Submitted 16 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
Turing-Universal Learners with Optimal Scaling Laws
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
For a given distribution, learning algorithm, and performance metric, the rate of convergence (or data-scaling law) is the asymptotic behavior of the algorithm's test performance as a function of number of train samples. Many learning methods in both theory and practice have power-law rates, i.e. performance scales as $n^{-α}$ for some $α> 0$. Moreover, both theoreticians and practitioners are con…
▽ More
For a given distribution, learning algorithm, and performance metric, the rate of convergence (or data-scaling law) is the asymptotic behavior of the algorithm's test performance as a function of number of train samples. Many learning methods in both theory and practice have power-law rates, i.e. performance scales as $n^{-α}$ for some $α> 0$. Moreover, both theoreticians and practitioners are concerned with improving the rates of their learning algorithms under settings of interest. We observe the existence of a "universal learner", which achieves the best possible distribution-dependent asymptotic rate among all learning algorithms within a specified runtime (e.g. $O(n^2)$), while incurring only polylogarithmic slowdown over this runtime. This algorithm is uniform, and does not depend on the distribution, and yet achieves best-possible rates for all distributions. The construction itself is a simple extension of Levin's universal search (Levin, 1973). And much like universal search, the universal learner is not at all practical, and is primarily of theoretical and philosophical interest.
△ Less
Submitted 9 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
-
Revisiting Model Stitching to Compare Neural Representations
Authors:
Yamini Bansal,
Preetum Nakkiran,
Boaz Barak
Abstract:
We revisit and extend model stitching (Lenc & Vedaldi 2015) as a methodology to study the internal representations of neural networks. Given two trained and frozen models $A$ and $B$, we consider a "stitched model'' formed by connecting the bottom-layers of $A$ to the top-layers of $B$, with a simple trainable layer between them. We argue that model stitching is a powerful and perhaps under-apprec…
▽ More
We revisit and extend model stitching (Lenc & Vedaldi 2015) as a methodology to study the internal representations of neural networks. Given two trained and frozen models $A$ and $B$, we consider a "stitched model'' formed by connecting the bottom-layers of $A$ to the top-layers of $B$, with a simple trainable layer between them. We argue that model stitching is a powerful and perhaps under-appreciated tool, which reveals aspects of representations that measures such as centered kernel alignment (CKA) cannot. Through extensive experiments, we use model stitching to obtain quantitative verifications for intuitive statements such as "good networks learn similar representations'', by demonstrating that good networks of the same architecture, but trained in very different ways (e.g.: supervised vs. self-supervised learning), can be stitched to each other without drop in performance. We also give evidence for the intuition that "more is better'' by showing that representations learnt with (1) more data, (2) bigger width, or (3) more training time can be "plugged in'' to weaker models to improve performance. Finally, our experiments reveal a new structural property of SGD which we call "stitching connectivity'', akin to mode-connectivity: typical minima reached by SGD can all be stitched to each other with minimal change in accuracy.
△ Less
Submitted 14 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
The Deep Bootstrap Framework: Good Online Learners are Good Offline Generalizers
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Behnam Neyshabur,
Hanie Sedghi
Abstract:
We propose a new framework for reasoning about generalization in deep learning. The core idea is to couple the Real World, where optimizers take stochastic gradient steps on the empirical loss, to an Ideal World, where optimizers take steps on the population loss. This leads to an alternate decomposition of test error into: (1) the Ideal World test error plus (2) the gap between the two worlds. If…
▽ More
We propose a new framework for reasoning about generalization in deep learning. The core idea is to couple the Real World, where optimizers take stochastic gradient steps on the empirical loss, to an Ideal World, where optimizers take steps on the population loss. This leads to an alternate decomposition of test error into: (1) the Ideal World test error plus (2) the gap between the two worlds. If the gap (2) is universally small, this reduces the problem of generalization in offline learning to the problem of optimization in online learning. We then give empirical evidence that this gap between worlds can be small in realistic deep learning settings, in particular supervised image classification. For example, CNNs generalize better than MLPs on image distributions in the Real World, but this is "because" they optimize faster on the population loss in the Ideal World. This suggests our framework is a useful tool for understanding generalization in deep learning, and lays a foundation for future research in the area.
△ Less
Submitted 18 February, 2021; v1 submitted 15 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Distributional Generalization: A New Kind of Generalization
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Yamini Bansal
Abstract:
We introduce a new notion of generalization -- Distributional Generalization -- which roughly states that outputs of a classifier at train and test time are close *as distributions*, as opposed to close in just their average error. For example, if we mislabel 30% of dogs as cats in the train set of CIFAR-10, then a ResNet trained to interpolation will in fact mislabel roughly 30% of dogs as cats o…
▽ More
We introduce a new notion of generalization -- Distributional Generalization -- which roughly states that outputs of a classifier at train and test time are close *as distributions*, as opposed to close in just their average error. For example, if we mislabel 30% of dogs as cats in the train set of CIFAR-10, then a ResNet trained to interpolation will in fact mislabel roughly 30% of dogs as cats on the *test set* as well, while leaving other classes unaffected. This behavior is not captured by classical generalization, which would only consider the average error and not the distribution of errors over the input domain. Our formal conjectures, which are much more general than this example, characterize the form of distributional generalization that can be expected in terms of problem parameters: model architecture, training procedure, number of samples, and data distribution. We give empirical evidence for these conjectures across a variety of domains in machine learning, including neural networks, kernel machines, and decision trees. Our results thus advance our empirical understanding of interpolating classifiers.
△ Less
Submitted 14 October, 2020; v1 submitted 17 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
Learning Rate Annealing Can Provably Help Generalization, Even for Convex Problems
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Learning rate schedule can significantly affect generalization performance in modern neural networks, but the reasons for this are not yet understood. Li-Wei-Ma (2019) recently proved this behavior can exist in a simplified non-convex neural-network setting. In this note, we show that this phenomenon can exist even for convex learning problems -- in particular, linear regression in 2 dimensions.…
▽ More
Learning rate schedule can significantly affect generalization performance in modern neural networks, but the reasons for this are not yet understood. Li-Wei-Ma (2019) recently proved this behavior can exist in a simplified non-convex neural-network setting. In this note, we show that this phenomenon can exist even for convex learning problems -- in particular, linear regression in 2 dimensions.
We give a toy convex problem where learning rate annealing (large initial learning rate, followed by small learning rate) can lead gradient descent to minima with provably better generalization than using a small learning rate throughout. In our case, this occurs due to a combination of the mismatch between the test and train loss landscapes, and early-stop**.
△ Less
Submitted 15 May, 2020;
originally announced May 2020.
-
Optimal Regularization Can Mitigate Double Descent
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Prayaag Venkat,
Sham Kakade,
Tengyu Ma
Abstract:
Recent empirical and theoretical studies have shown that many learning algorithms -- from linear regression to neural networks -- can have test performance that is non-monotonic in quantities such the sample size and model size. This striking phenomenon, often referred to as "double descent", has raised questions of if we need to re-think our current understanding of generalization. In this work,…
▽ More
Recent empirical and theoretical studies have shown that many learning algorithms -- from linear regression to neural networks -- can have test performance that is non-monotonic in quantities such the sample size and model size. This striking phenomenon, often referred to as "double descent", has raised questions of if we need to re-think our current understanding of generalization. In this work, we study whether the double-descent phenomenon can be avoided by using optimal regularization. Theoretically, we prove that for certain linear regression models with isotropic data distribution, optimally-tuned $\ell_2$ regularization achieves monotonic test performance as we grow either the sample size or the model size. We also demonstrate empirically that optimally-tuned $\ell_2$ regularization can mitigate double descent for more general models, including neural networks. Our results suggest that it may also be informative to study the test risk scalings of various algorithms in the context of appropriately tuned regularization.
△ Less
Submitted 29 April, 2021; v1 submitted 4 March, 2020;
originally announced March 2020.
-
More Data Can Hurt for Linear Regression: Sample-wise Double Descent
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
In this expository note we describe a surprising phenomenon in overparameterized linear regression, where the dimension exceeds the number of samples: there is a regime where the test risk of the estimator found by gradient descent increases with additional samples. In other words, more data actually hurts the estimator. This behavior is implicit in a recent line of theoretical works analyzing "do…
▽ More
In this expository note we describe a surprising phenomenon in overparameterized linear regression, where the dimension exceeds the number of samples: there is a regime where the test risk of the estimator found by gradient descent increases with additional samples. In other words, more data actually hurts the estimator. This behavior is implicit in a recent line of theoretical works analyzing "double-descent" phenomenon in linear models. In this note, we isolate and understand this behavior in an extremely simple setting: linear regression with isotropic Gaussian covariates. In particular, this occurs due to an unconventional type of bias-variance tradeoff in the overparameterized regime: the bias decreases with more samples, but variance increases.
△ Less
Submitted 16 December, 2019;
originally announced December 2019.
-
Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurt
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Gal Kaplun,
Yamini Bansal,
Tristan Yang,
Boaz Barak,
Ilya Sutskever
Abstract:
We show that a variety of modern deep learning tasks exhibit a "double-descent" phenomenon where, as we increase model size, performance first gets worse and then gets better. Moreover, we show that double descent occurs not just as a function of model size, but also as a function of the number of training epochs. We unify the above phenomena by defining a new complexity measure we call the effect…
▽ More
We show that a variety of modern deep learning tasks exhibit a "double-descent" phenomenon where, as we increase model size, performance first gets worse and then gets better. Moreover, we show that double descent occurs not just as a function of model size, but also as a function of the number of training epochs. We unify the above phenomena by defining a new complexity measure we call the effective model complexity and conjecture a generalized double descent with respect to this measure. Furthermore, our notion of model complexity allows us to identify certain regimes where increasing (even quadrupling) the number of train samples actually hurts test performance.
△ Less
Submitted 4 December, 2019;
originally announced December 2019.
-
SGD on Neural Networks Learns Functions of Increasing Complexity
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Gal Kaplun,
Dimitris Kalimeris,
Tristan Yang,
Benjamin L. Edelman,
Fred Zhang,
Boaz Barak
Abstract:
We perform an experimental study of the dynamics of Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) in learning deep neural networks for several real and synthetic classification tasks. We show that in the initial epochs, almost all of the performance improvement of the classifier obtained by SGD can be explained by a linear classifier. More generally, we give evidence for the hypothesis that, as iterations pro…
▽ More
We perform an experimental study of the dynamics of Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) in learning deep neural networks for several real and synthetic classification tasks. We show that in the initial epochs, almost all of the performance improvement of the classifier obtained by SGD can be explained by a linear classifier. More generally, we give evidence for the hypothesis that, as iterations progress, SGD learns functions of increasing complexity. This hypothesis can be helpful in explaining why SGD-learned classifiers tend to generalize well even in the over-parameterized regime. We also show that the linear classifier learned in the initial stages is "retained" throughout the execution even if training is continued to the point of zero training error, and complement this with a theoretical result in a simplified model. Key to our work is a new measure of how well one classifier explains the performance of another, based on conditional mutual information.
△ Less
Submitted 28 May, 2019;
originally announced May 2019.
-
Computational Limitations in Robust Classification and Win-Win Results
Authors:
Akshay Degwekar,
Preetum Nakkiran,
Vinod Vaikuntanathan
Abstract:
We continue the study of statistical/computational tradeoffs in learning robust classifiers, following the recent work of Bubeck, Lee, Price and Razenshteyn who showed examples of classification tasks where (a) an efficient robust classifier exists, in the small-perturbation regime; (b) a non-robust classifier can be learned efficiently; but (c) it is computationally hard to learn a robust classif…
▽ More
We continue the study of statistical/computational tradeoffs in learning robust classifiers, following the recent work of Bubeck, Lee, Price and Razenshteyn who showed examples of classification tasks where (a) an efficient robust classifier exists, in the small-perturbation regime; (b) a non-robust classifier can be learned efficiently; but (c) it is computationally hard to learn a robust classifier, assuming the hardness of factoring large numbers. The question of whether a robust classifier for their task exists in the large perturbation regime seems related to important open questions in computational number theory. In this work, we extend their work in three directions.
First, we demonstrate classification tasks where computationally efficient robust classification is impossible, even when computationally unbounded robust classifiers exist. For this, we rely on the existence of average-case hard functions.
Second, we show hard-to-robustly-learn classification tasks in the large-perturbation regime. Namely, we show that even though an efficient classifier that is robust to large perturbations exists, it is computationally hard to learn any non-trivial robust classifier. Our first construction relies on the existence of one-way functions, and the second on the hardness of the learning parity with noise problem. In the latter setting, not only does a non-robust classifier exist, but also an efficient algorithm that generates fresh new labeled samples given access to polynomially many training examples (termed as generation by Kearns et. al. (1994)).
Third, we show that any such counterexample implies the existence of cryptographic primitives such as one-way functions. This leads us to a win-win scenario: either we can learn an efficient robust classifier, or we can construct new instances of cryptographic primitives.
△ Less
Submitted 5 June, 2019; v1 submitted 4 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
-
Adversarial Robustness May Be at Odds With Simplicity
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran
Abstract:
Current techniques in machine learning are so far are unable to learn classifiers that are robust to adversarial perturbations. However, they are able to learn non-robust classifiers with very high accuracy, even in the presence of random perturbations. Towards explaining this gap, we highlight the hypothesis that…
▽ More
Current techniques in machine learning are so far are unable to learn classifiers that are robust to adversarial perturbations. However, they are able to learn non-robust classifiers with very high accuracy, even in the presence of random perturbations. Towards explaining this gap, we highlight the hypothesis that $\textit{robust classification may require more complex classifiers (i.e. more capacity) than standard classification.}$
In this note, we show that this hypothesis is indeed possible, by giving several theoretical examples of classification tasks and sets of "simple" classifiers for which: (1) There exists a simple classifier with high standard accuracy, and also high accuracy under random $\ell_\infty$ noise. (2) Any simple classifier is not robust: it must have high adversarial loss with $\ell_\infty$ perturbations. (3) Robust classification is possible, but only with more complex classifiers (exponentially more complex, in some examples).
Moreover, $\textit{there is a quantitative trade-off between robustness and standard accuracy among simple classifiers.}$ This suggests an alternate explanation of this phenomenon, which appears in practice: the tradeoff may occur not because the classification task inherently requires such a tradeoff (as in [Tsipras-Santurkar-Engstrom-Turner-Madry `18]), but because the structure of our current classifiers imposes such a tradeoff.
△ Less
Submitted 2 January, 2019;
originally announced January 2019.
-
The Generic Holdout: Preventing False-Discoveries in Adaptive Data Science
Authors:
Preetum Nakkiran,
Jarosław Błasiok
Abstract:
Adaptive data analysis has posed a challenge to science due to its ability to generate false hypotheses on moderately large data sets. In general, with non-adaptive data analyses (where queries to the data are generated without being influenced by answers to previous queries) a data set containing $n$ samples may support exponentially many queries in $n$. This number reduces to linearly many under…
▽ More
Adaptive data analysis has posed a challenge to science due to its ability to generate false hypotheses on moderately large data sets. In general, with non-adaptive data analyses (where queries to the data are generated without being influenced by answers to previous queries) a data set containing $n$ samples may support exponentially many queries in $n$. This number reduces to linearly many under naive adaptive data analysis, and even sophisticated remedies such as the Reusable Holdout (Dwork et. al 2015) only allow quadratically many queries in $n$.
In this work, we propose a new framework for adaptive science which exponentially improves on this number of queries under a restricted yet scientifically relevant setting, where the goal of the scientist is to find a single (or a few) true hypotheses about the universe based on the samples. Such a setting may describe the search for predictive factors of some disease based on medical data, where the analyst may wish to try a number of predictive models until a satisfactory one is found.
Our solution, the Generic Holdout, involves two simple ingredients: (1) a partitioning of the data into a exploration set and a holdout set and (2) a limited exposure strategy for the holdout set. An analyst is free to use the exploration set arbitrarily, but when testing hypotheses against the holdout set, the analyst only learns the answer to the question: "Is the given hypothesis true (empirically) on the holdout set?" -- and no more information, such as "how well" the hypothesis fits the holdout set. The resulting scheme is immediate to analyze, but despite its simplicity we do not believe our method is obvious, as evidenced by the many violations in practice.
Our proposal can be seen as an alternative to pre-registration, and allows researchers to get the benefits of adaptive data analysis without the problems of adaptivity.
△ Less
Submitted 14 September, 2018;
originally announced September 2018.
