Multivariate Stochastic Dominance via Optimal Transport and Applications to Models Benchmarking

Stochastic dominance is an important concept in probability theory, econometrics and social choice theory for robustly modeling agents' preferences between random outcomes. While many works have been dedicated to the univariate case, little has been done in the multivariate scenario, wherein an agent has to decide between different multivariate outcomes. By exploiting a characterization of multivariate first stochastic dominance in terms of couplings, we introduce a statistic that assesses multivariate almost stochastic dominance under the framework of Optimal Transport with a smooth cost. Further, we introduce an entropic regularization of this statistic, and establish a central limit theorem (CLT) and consistency of the bootstrap procedure for the empirical statistic. Armed with this CLT, we propose a hypothesis testing framework as well as an efficient implementation using the Sinkhorn algorithm. We showcase our method in comparing and benchmarking Large Language Models that are evaluated on multiple metrics. Our multivariate stochastic dominance test allows us to capture the dependencies between the metrics in order to make an informed and statistically significant decision on the relative performance of the models.

Distributional Preference Alignment of LLMs via Optimal Transport

Current LLM alignment techniques use pairwise human preferences at a sample level, and as such, they do not imply an alignment on the distributional level. We propose in this paper Alignment via Optimal Transport (AOT), a novel method for distributional preference alignment of LLMs. AOT aligns LLMs on unpaired preference data by making the reward distribution of the positive samples stochastically dominant in the first order on the distribution of negative samples. We introduce a convex relaxation of this first-order stochastic dominance and cast it as an optimal transport problem with a smooth and convex cost. Thanks to the one-dimensional nature of the resulting optimal transport problem and the convexity of the cost, it has a closed-form solution via sorting on empirical measures. We fine-tune LLMs with this AOT objective, which enables alignment by penalizing the violation of the stochastic dominance of the reward distribution of the positive samples on the reward distribution of the negative samples. We analyze the sample complexity of AOT by considering the dual of the OT problem and show that it converges at the parametric rate. Empirically, we show on a diverse set of alignment datasets and LLMs that AOT leads to state-of-the-art models in the 7B family of models when evaluated with Open LLM Benchmarks and AlpacaEval.

Outline-Guided Object Inpainting with Diffusion Models

Instance segmentation datasets play a crucial role in training accurate and robust computer vision models. However, obtaining accurate mask annotations to produce high-quality segmentation datasets is a costly and labor-intensive process. In this work, we show how this issue can be mitigated by starting with small annotated instance segmentation datasets and augmenting them to effectively obtain a sizeable annotated dataset. We achieve that by creating variations of the available annotated object instances in a way that preserves the provided mask annotations, thereby resulting in new image-mask pairs to be added to the set of annotated images. Specifically, we generate new images using a diffusion-based inpainting model to fill out the masked area with a desired object class by guiding the diffusion through the object outline. We show that the object outline provides a simple, but also reliable and convenient training-free guidance signal for the underlying inpainting model that is often sufficient to fill out the mask with an object of the correct class without further text guidance and preserve the correspondence between generated images and the mask annotations with high precision. Our experimental results reveal that our method successfully generates realistic variations of object instances, preserving their shape characteristics while introducing diversity within the augmented area. We also show that the proposed method can naturally be combined with text guidance and other image augmentation techniques.

On the generalization capacity of neural networks during generic multimodal reasoning

The advent of the Transformer has led to the development of large language models (LLM), which appear to demonstrate human-like capabilities. To assess the generality of this class of models and a variety of other base neural network architectures to multimodal domains, we evaluated and compared their capacity for multimodal generalization. We introduce a multimodal question-answer benchmark to evaluate three specific types of out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization performance: distractor generalization (generalization in the presence of distractors), systematic compositional generalization (generalization to new task permutations), and productive compositional generalization (generalization to more complex tasks structures). We found that across model architectures (e.g., RNNs, Transformers, Perceivers, etc.), models with multiple attention layers, or models that leveraged cross-attention mechanisms between input domains, fared better. Our positive results demonstrate that for multimodal distractor and systematic generalization, either cross-modal attention or models with deeper attention layers are key architectural features required to integrate multimodal inputs. On the other hand, neither of these architectural features led to productive generalization, suggesting fundamental limitations of existing architectures for specific types of multimodal generalization. These results demonstrate the strengths and limitations of specific architectural components underlying modern neural models for multimodal reasoning. Finally, we provide Generic COG (gCOG), a configurable benchmark with several multimodal generalization splits, for future studies to explore.

Unraveling the Key Components of OOD Generalization via Diversification

Real-world datasets may contain multiple features that explain the training data equally well, i.e., learning any of them would lead to correct predictions on the training data. However, many of them can be spurious, i.e., lose their predictive power under a distribution shift and fail to generalize to out-of-distribution (OOD) data. Recently developed ``diversification'' methods approach this problem by finding multiple diverse hypotheses that rely on different features. This paper aims to study this class of methods and identify the key components contributing to their OOD generalization abilities. We show that (1) diversification methods are highly sensitive to the distribution of the unlabeled data used for diversification and can underperform significantly when away from a method-specific sweet spot. (2) Diversification alone is insufficient for OOD generalization. The choice of the used learning algorithm, e.g., the model's architecture and pretraining, is crucial, and using the second-best choice leads to an up to 20% absolute drop in accuracy.(3) The optimal choice of learning algorithm depends on the unlabeled data, and vice versa.Finally, we show that the above pitfalls cannot be alleviated by increasing the number of diverse hypotheses, allegedly the major feature of diversification methods. These findings provide a clearer understanding of the critical design factors influencing the OOD generalization of diversification methods. They can guide practitioners in how to use the existing methods best and guide researchers in developing new, better ones.

Risk Assessment and Statistical Significance in the Age of Foundation Models

We propose a distributional framework for assessing socio-technical risks of foundation models with quantified statistical significance. Our approach hinges on a new statistical relative testing based on first and second order stochastic dominance of real random variables. We show that the second order statistics in this test are linked to mean-risk models commonly used in econometrics and mathematical finance to balance risk and utility when choosing between alternatives. Using this framework, we formally develop a risk-aware approach for foundation model selection given guardrails quantified by specified metrics. Inspired by portfolio optimization and selection theory in mathematical finance, we define a \emph{metrics portfolio} for each model as a means to aggregate a collection of metrics, and perform model selection based on the stochastic dominance of these portfolios. The statistical significance of our tests is backed theoretically by an asymptotic analysis via central limit theorems instantiated in practice via a bootstrap variance estimate. We use our framework to compare various large language models regarding risks related to drifting from instructions and outputting toxic content.

DARE: Towards Robust Text Explanations in Biomedical and Healthcare Applications

Along with the successful deployment of deep neural networks in several application domains, the need to unravel the black-box nature of these networks has seen a significant increase recently. Several methods have been introduced to provide insight into the inference process of deep neural networks. However, most of these explainability methods have been shown to be brittle in the face of adversarial perturbations of their inputs in the image and generic textual domain. In this work we show that this phenomenon extends to specific and important high stakes domains like biomedical datasets. In particular, we observe that the robustness of explanations should be characterized in terms of the accuracy of the explanation in linking a model's inputs and its decisions - faithfulness - and its relevance from the perspective of domain experts - plausibility. This is crucial to prevent explanations that are inaccurate but still look convincing in the context of the domain at hand. To this end, we show how to adapt current attribution robustness estimation methods to a given domain, so as to take into account domain-specific plausibility. This results in our DomainAdaptiveAREstimator (DARE) attribution robustness estimator, allowing us to properly characterize the domain-specific robustness of faithful explanations. Next, we provide two methods, adversarial training and FAR training, to mitigate the brittleness characterized by DARE, allowing us to train networks that display robust attributions. Finally, we empirically validate our methods with extensive experiments on three established biomedical benchmarks.

Adaptive Conformal Regression with Jackknife+ Rescaled Scores

Conformal regression provides prediction intervals with global coverage guarantees, but often fails to capture local error distributions, leading to non-homogeneous coverage. We address this with a new adaptive method based on rescaling conformal scores with an estimate of local score distribution, inspired by the Jackknife+ method, which enables the use of calibration data in conformal scores without breaking calibration-test exchangeability. Our approach ensures formal global coverage guarantees and is supported by new theoretical results on local coverage, including an a posteriori bound on any calibration score. The strength of our approach lies in achieving local coverage without sacrificing calibration set size, improving the applicability of conformal prediction intervals in various settings. As a result, our method provides prediction intervals that outperform previous methods, particularly in the low-data regime, making it especially relevant for real-world applications such as healthcare and biomedical domains where uncertainty needs to be quantified accurately despite low sample data.

Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs

Data collected from the real world tends to be biased, unbalanced, and at risk of exposing sensitive and private information. This reality has given rise to the idea of creating synthetic datasets to alleviate risk, bias, harm, and privacy concerns inherent in the real data. This concept relies on Generative AI models to produce unbiased, privacy-preserving synthetic data while being true to the real data. In this new paradigm, how can we tell if this approach delivers on its promises? We present an auditing framework that offers a holistic assessment of synthetic datasets and AI models trained on them, centered around bias and discrimination prevention, fidelity to the real data, utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We showcase our framework by auditing multiple generative models on diverse use cases, including education, healthcare, banking, human resources, and across different modalities, from tabular, to time-series, to natural language. Our use cases demonstrate the importance of a holistic assessment in order to ensure compliance with socio-technical safeguards that regulators and policymakers are increasingly enforcing. For this purpose, we introduce the trust index that ranks multiple synthetic datasets based on their prescribed safeguards and their desired trade-offs. Moreover, we devise a trust-index-driven model selection and cross-validation procedure via auditing in the training loop that we showcase on a class of transformer models that we dub TrustFormers, across different modalities. This trust-driven model selection allows for controllable trust trade-offs in the resulting synthetic data. We instrument our auditing framework with workflows that connect different stakeholders from model development to audit and certification via a synthetic data auditing report.

Estimating the Adversarial Robustness of Attributions in Text with Transformers

Explanations are crucial parts of deep neural network (DNN) classifiers. In high stakes applications, faithful and robust explanations are important to understand and gain trust in DNN classifiers. However, recent work has shown that state-of-the-art attribution methods in text classifiers are susceptible to imperceptible adversarial perturbations that alter explanations significantly while maintaining the correct prediction outcome. If undetected, this can critically mislead the users of DNNs. Thus, it is crucial to understand the influence of such adversarial perturbations on the networks' explanations and their perceptibility. In this work, we establish a novel definition of attribution robustness (AR) in text classification, based on Lipschitz continuity. Crucially, it reflects both attribution change induced by adversarial input alterations and perceptibility of such alterations. Moreover, we introduce a wide set of text similarity measures to effectively capture locality between two text samples and imperceptibility of adversarial perturbations in text. We then propose our novel TransformerExplanationAttack (TEA), a strong adversary that provides a tight estimation for attribution robustness in text classification. TEA uses state-of-the-art language models to extract word substitutions that result in fluent, contextual adversarial samples. Finally, with experiments on several text classification architectures, we show that TEA consistently outperforms current state-of-the-art AR estimators, yielding perturbations that alter explanations to a greater extent while being more fluent and less perceptible.