A landmark negative result of Long and Servedio established a worst-case spectacular failure of a supervised learning trio (loss, algorithm, model) otherwise praised for its high precision machinery. Hundreds of papers followed up on the two suspected culprits: the loss (for being convex) and/or the algorithm (for fitting a classical boosting blueprint). Here, we call to the half-century+ founding theory of losses for class probability estimation (properness), an extension of Long and Servedio's results and a new general boosting algorithm to demonstrate that the real culprit in their specific context was in fact the (linear) model class. We advocate for a more general stanpoint on the problem as we argue that the source of the negative result lies in the dark side of a pervasive -- and otherwise prized -- aspect of ML: \textit{parameterisation}.
Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) is a family of "coherent risk measures" which generalize the traditional mathematical expectation. Widely used in mathematical finance, it is garnering increasing interest in machine learning, e.g., as an alternate approach to regularization, and as a means for ensuring fairness. This paper presents a generalization bound for learning algorithms that minimize the CVaR of the empirical loss. The bound is of PAC-Bayesian type and is guaranteed to be small when the empirical CVaR is small. We achieve this by reducing the problem of estimating CVaR to that of merely estimating an expectation. This then enables us, as a by-product, to obtain concentration inequalities for CVaR even when the random variable in question is unbounded.
The study of a machine learning problem is in many ways is difficult to separate from the study of the loss function being used. One avenue of inquiry has been to look at these loss functions in terms of their properties as scoring rules via the proper-composite representation, in which predictions are mapped to probability distributions which are then scored via a scoring rule. However, recent research so far has primarily been concerned with analysing the (typically) finite-dimensional conditional risk problem on the output space, leaving aside the larger total risk minimisation. We generalise a number of these results to an infinite dimensional setting and in doing so we are able to exploit the familial resemblance of density and conditional density estimation to provide a simple characterisation of the canonical link.
Since the introduction of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and Variational Autoencoders (VAE), the literature on generative modelling has witnessed an overwhelming resurgence. The impressive, yet elusive empirical performance of GANs has lead to the rise of many GAN-VAE hybrids, with the hopes of GAN level performance and additional benefits of VAE, such as an encoder for feature reduction, which is not offered by GANs. Recently, the Wasserstein Autoencoder (WAE) was proposed, achieving performance similar to that of GANs, yet it is still unclear whether the two are fundamentally different or can be further improved into a unified model. In this work, we study the $f$-GAN and WAE models and make two main discoveries. First, we find that the $f$-GAN objective is equivalent to an autoencoder-like objective, which has close links, and is in some cases equivalent to the WAE objective - we refer to this as the $f$-WAE. This equivalence allows us to explicate the success of WAE. Second, the equivalence result allows us to, for the first time, prove generalization bounds for Autoencoder models (WAE and $f$-WAE), which is a pertinent problem when it comes to theoretical analyses of generative models. Furthermore, we show that the $f$-WAE objective is related to other statistical quantities such as the $f$-divergence and in particular, upper bounded by the Wasserstein distance, which then allows us to tap into existing efficient (regularized) OT solvers to minimize $f$-WAE. Our findings thus recommend the $f$-WAE as a tighter alternative to WAE, comment on generalization abilities and make a step towards unifying these models.
Ensuring that classifiers are non-discriminatory or fair with respect to a sensitive feature (e.g., race or gender) is a topical problem. Progress in this task requires fixing a definition of fairness, and there have been several proposals in this regard over the past few years. Several of these, however, assume either binary sensitive features (thus precluding categorical or real-valued sensitive groups), or result in non-convex objectives (thus adversely affecting the optimisation landscape). In this paper, we propose a new definition of fairness that generalises some existing proposals, while allowing for generic sensitive features and resulting in a convex objective. The key idea is to enforce that the expected losses (or risks) across each subgroup induced by the sensitive feature are commensurate. We show how this relates to the rich literature on risk measures from mathematical finance. As a special case, this leads to a new convex fairness-aware objective based on minimising the conditional value at risk (CVaR).
We consider the setting of prediction with expert advice; a learner makes predictions by aggregating those of a group of experts. Under this setting, and for the right choice of loss function and "mixing" algorithm, it is possible for the learner to achieve a constant regret regardless of the number of prediction rounds. For example, a constant regret can be achieved for \emph{mixable} losses using the \emph{aggregating algorithm}. The \emph{Generalized Aggregating Algorithm} (GAA) is a name for a family of algorithms parameterized by convex functions on simplices (entropies), which reduce to the aggregating algorithm when using the \emph{Shannon entropy} $\operatorname{S}$. For a given entropy $\Phi$, losses for which a constant regret is possible using the \textsc{GAA} are called $\Phi$-mixable. Which losses are $\Phi$-mixable was previously left as an open question. We fully characterize $\Phi$-mixability and answer other open questions posed by \cite{Reid2015}. We show that the Shannon entropy $\operatorname{S}$ is fundamental in nature when it comes to mixability; any $\Phi$-mixable loss is necessarily $\operatorname{S}$-mixable, and the lowest worst-case regret of the \textsc{GAA} is achieved using the Shannon entropy. Finally, by leveraging the connection between the \emph{mirror descent algorithm} and the update step of the GAA, we suggest a new \emph{adaptive} generalized aggregating algorithm and analyze its performance in terms of the regret bound.
The goal of online prediction with expert advice is to find a decision strategy which will perform almost as well as the best expert in a given pool of experts, on any sequence of outcomes. This problem has been widely studied and $O(\sqrt{T})$ and $O(\log{T})$ regret bounds can be achieved for convex losses (\cite{zinkevich2003online}) and strictly convex losses with bounded first and second derivatives (\cite{hazan2007logarithmic}) respectively. In special cases like the Aggregating Algorithm (\cite{vovk1995game}) with mixable losses and the Weighted Average Algorithm (\cite{kivinen1999averaging}) with exp-concave losses, it is possible to achieve $O(1)$ regret bounds. \cite{van2012exp} has argued that mixability and exp-concavity are roughly equivalent under certain conditions. Thus by understanding the underlying relationship between these two notions we can gain the best of both algorithms (strong theoretical performance guarantees of the Aggregating Algorithm and the computational efficiency of the Weighted Average Algorithm). In this paper we provide a complete characterization of the exp-concavity of any proper composite loss. Using this characterization and the mixability condition of proper losses (\cite{van2012mixability}), we show that it is possible to transform (re-parameterize) any $\beta$-mixable binary proper loss into a $\beta$-exp-concave composite loss with the same $\beta$. In the multi-class case, we propose an approximation approach for this transformation.
The cost-sensitive classification problem plays a crucial role in mission-critical machine learning applications, and differs with traditional classification by taking the misclassification costs into consideration. Although being studied extensively in the literature, the fundamental limits of this problem are still not well understood. We investigate the hardness of this problem by extending the standard minimax lower bound of balanced binary classification problem (due to \cite{massart2006risk}), and emphasize the impact of cost terms on the hardness.
Machine learning systems are increasingly used to make decisions about people's lives, such as whether to give someone a loan or whether to interview someone for a job. This has led to considerable interest in making such machine learning systems fair. One approach is to transform the input data used by the algorithm. This can be achieved by passing each input data point through a representation function prior to its use in training or testing. Techniques for learning such representation functions from data have been successful empirically, but typically lack theoretical fairness guarantees. We show that it is possible to prove that a representation function is fair according to common measures of both group and individual fairness, as well as useful with respect to a target task. These provable properties can be used in a governance model involving a data producer, a data user and a data regulator, where there is a separation of concerns between fairness and target task utility to ensure transparency and prevent perverse incentives. We formally define the 'cost of mistrust' of using this model compared to the setting where there is a single trusted party, and provide bounds on this cost in particular cases. We present a practical approach to learning fair representation functions and apply it to financial and criminal justice datasets. We evaluate the fairness and utility of these representation functions using measures motivated by our theoretical results.
Nowozin \textit{et al} showed last year how to extend the GAN \textit{principle} to all $f$-divergences. The approach is elegant but falls short of a full description of the supervised game, and says little about the key player, the generator: for example, what does the generator actually converge to if solving the GAN game means convergence in some space of parameters? How does that provide hints on the generator's design and compare to the flourishing but almost exclusively experimental literature on the subject? In this paper, we unveil a broad class of distributions for which such convergence happens --- namely, deformed exponential families, a wide superset of exponential families --- and show tight connections with the three other key GAN parameters: loss, game and architecture. In particular, we show that current deep architectures are able to factorize a very large number of such densities using an especially compact design, hence displaying the power of deep architectures and their concinnity in the $f$-GAN game. This result holds given a sufficient condition on \textit{activation functions} --- which turns out to be satisfied by popular choices. The key to our results is a variational generalization of an old theorem that relates the KL divergence between regular exponential families and divergences between their natural parameters. We complete this picture with additional results and experimental insights on how these results may be used to ground further improvements of GAN architectures, via (i) a principled design of the activation functions in the generator and (ii) an explicit integration of proper composite losses' link function in the discriminator.