Logic of Machine Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.09500v4
• Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:50:38 GMT
• Title: Logic of Machine Learning
• Authors: Marina Sapir
• Abstract summary: I suggest that prediction requires belief in "predictability" of the underlying dependence. I show on examples of many popular textbook learners that each of them minimizes its own version of incongruity.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The main question is: why and how can we ever predict based on a finite sample? The question is not answered by statistical learning theory. Here, I suggest that prediction requires belief in "predictability" of the underlying dependence, and learning involves search for a hypothesis where these beliefs are violated the least given the observations. The measure of these violations ("errors") for given data, hypothesis and particular type of predictability beliefs is formalized as concept of incongruity in modal Logic of Observations and Hypotheses (LOH). I show on examples of many popular textbook learners (from hierarchical clustering to k-NN and SVM) that each of them minimizes its own version of incongruity. In addition, the concept of incongruity is shown to be flexible enough for formalization of some important data analysis problems, not considered as part of ML.

Related papers

• Causal modelling without introducing counterfactuals or abstract distributions [7.09435109588801]
  In this paper, we construe causal inference as treatment-wise predictions for finite populations where all assumptions are testable. The new framework highlights the model-dependence of causal claims as well as the difference between statistical and scientific inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-24T16:07:57Z)
• Credal Learning Theory [4.64390130376307]
  We lay the foundations for a credal' theory of learning, using convex sets of probabilities to model the variability in the data-generating distribution. Bounds are derived for the case of finite hypotheses spaces, as well as infinite model spaces, which directly generalize classical results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T19:25:58Z)
• A Simple Generative Model of Logical Reasoning and Statistical Learning [0.6853165736531939]
  Statistical learning and logical reasoning are two major fields of AI expected to be unified for human-like machine intelligence. We here propose a simple Bayesian model of logical reasoning and statistical learning. We simply model how data causes symbolic knowledge in terms of its satisfiability in formal logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-18T16:34:51Z)
• Reinterpreting causal discovery as the task of predicting unobserved joint statistics [15.088547731564782]
  We argue that causal discovery can help inferring properties of the unobserved joint distributions' We define a learning scenario where the input is a subset of variables and the label is some statistical property of that subset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-11T15:30:54Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)
• On the Paradox of Learning to Reason from Data [86.13662838603761]
  We show that BERT can attain near-perfect accuracy on in-distribution test examples while failing to generalize to other data distributions over the exact same problem space. Our study provides an explanation for this paradox: instead of learning to emulate the correct reasoning function, BERT has in fact learned statistical features that inherently exist in logical reasoning problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T17:56:48Z)
• Visual Abductive Reasoning [85.17040703205608]
  Abductive reasoning seeks the likeliest possible explanation for partial observations. We propose a new task and dataset, Visual Abductive Reasoning ( VAR), for examining abductive reasoning ability of machine intelligence in everyday visual situations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-26T10:17:03Z)
• Understanding the Under-Coverage Bias in Uncertainty Estimation [58.03725169462616]
  quantile regression tends to emphunder-cover than the desired coverage level in reality. We prove that quantile regression suffers from an inherent under-coverage bias. Our theory reveals that this under-coverage bias stems from a certain high-dimensional parameter estimation error.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-10T06:11:55Z)
• Counterfactual Invariance to Spurious Correlations: Why and How to Pass Stress Tests [87.60900567941428]
  A spurious correlation' is the dependence of a model on some aspect of the input data that an analyst thinks shouldn't matter. In machine learning, these have a know-it-when-you-see-it character. We study stress testing using the tools of causal inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-31T14:39:38Z)
• Causal Expectation-Maximisation [70.45873402967297]
  We show that causal inference is NP-hard even in models characterised by polytree-shaped graphs. We introduce the causal EM algorithm to reconstruct the uncertainty about the latent variables from data about categorical manifest variables. We argue that there appears to be an unnoticed limitation to the trending idea that counterfactual bounds can often be computed without knowledge of the structural equations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-04T10:25:13Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.