Robust Distributed Learning: Tight Error Bounds and Breakdown Point under Data Heterogeneity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.13591v2
• Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 09:32:53 GMT
• Title: Robust Distributed Learning: Tight Error Bounds and Breakdown Point under Data Heterogeneity
• Authors: Youssef Allouah, Rachid Guerraoui, Nirupam Gupta, Rafa\"el Pinot, Geovani Rizk
• Abstract summary: We consider in this paper a more realistic heterogeneity model, namely (G,B)-gradient dissimilarity, and show that it covers a larger class of learning problems than existing theory. We also prove a new lower bound on the learning error of any distributed learning algorithm.
• Score: 11.2120847961379
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The theory underlying robust distributed learning algorithms, designed to resist adversarial machines, matches empirical observations when data is homogeneous. Under data heterogeneity however, which is the norm in practical scenarios, established lower bounds on the learning error are essentially vacuous and greatly mismatch empirical observations. This is because the heterogeneity model considered is too restrictive and does not cover basic learning tasks such as least-squares regression. We consider in this paper a more realistic heterogeneity model, namely (G,B)-gradient dissimilarity, and show that it covers a larger class of learning problems than existing theory. Notably, we show that the breakdown point under heterogeneity is lower than the classical fraction 1/2. We also prove a new lower bound on the learning error of any distributed learning algorithm. We derive a matching upper bound for a robust variant of distributed gradient descent, and empirically show that our analysis reduces the gap between theory and practice.

Related papers

• A Unified Generalization Analysis of Re-Weighting and Logit-Adjustment for Imbalanced Learning [129.63326990812234]
  We propose a technique named data-dependent contraction to capture how modified losses handle different classes. On top of this technique, a fine-grained generalization bound is established for imbalanced learning, which helps reveal the mystery of re-weighting and logit-adjustment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-07T09:15:08Z)
• Fine-grained analysis of non-parametric estimation for pairwise learning [9.676007573960383]
  We are concerned with the generalization performance of non-parametric estimation for pairwise learning. Our results can be used to handle a wide range of pairwise learning problems including ranking, AUC, pairwise regression and metric and similarity learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T08:13:14Z)
• Demystifying Disagreement-on-the-Line in High Dimensions [34.103373453782744]
  We develop a theoretical foundation for analyzing disagreement in high-dimensional random features regression. Experiments on CIFAR-10-C, Tiny ImageNet-C, and Camelyon17 are consistent with our theory and support the universality of the theoretical findings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-31T02:31:18Z)
• MaxMatch: Semi-Supervised Learning with Worst-Case Consistency [149.03760479533855]
  We propose a worst-case consistency regularization technique for semi-supervised learning (SSL) We present a generalization bound for SSL consisting of the empirical loss terms observed on labeled and unlabeled training data separately. Motivated by this bound, we derive an SSL objective that minimizes the largest inconsistency between an original unlabeled sample and its multiple augmented variants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-26T12:04:49Z)
• Chaos is a Ladder: A New Theoretical Understanding of Contrastive Learning via Augmentation Overlap [64.60460828425502]
  We propose a new guarantee on the downstream performance of contrastive learning. Our new theory hinges on the insight that the support of different intra-class samples will become more overlapped under aggressive data augmentations. We propose an unsupervised model selection metric ARC that aligns well with downstream accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-25T05:36:26Z)
• Robust Unsupervised Learning via L-Statistic Minimization [38.49191945141759]
  We present a general approach to this problem focusing on unsupervised learning. The key assumption is that the perturbing distribution is characterized by larger losses relative to a given class of admissible models. We prove uniform convergence bounds with respect to the proposed criterion for several popular models in unsupervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-14T10:36:06Z)
• Understanding Double Descent Requires a Fine-Grained Bias-Variance Decomposition [34.235007566913396]
  We describe an interpretable, symmetric decomposition of the variance into terms associated with the labels. We find that the bias decreases monotonically with the network width, but the variance terms exhibit non-monotonic behavior. We also analyze the strikingly rich phenomenology that arises.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-04T21:04:02Z)
• Theoretical Analysis of Self-Training with Deep Networks on Unlabeled Data [48.4779912667317]
  Self-training algorithms have been very successful for learning with unlabeled data using neural networks. This work provides a unified theoretical analysis of self-training with deep networks for semi-supervised learning, unsupervised domain adaptation, and unsupervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-07T19:43:55Z)
• Good Classifiers are Abundant in the Interpolating Regime [64.72044662855612]
  We develop a methodology to compute precisely the full distribution of test errors among interpolating classifiers. We find that test errors tend to concentrate around a small typical value $varepsilon*$, which deviates substantially from the test error of worst-case interpolating model. Our results show that the usual style of analysis in statistical learning theory may not be fine-grained enough to capture the good generalization performance observed in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-22T21:12:31Z)
• An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlations [98.3066727301239]
  We identify two key properties of the training data that drive this behavior. We show how the inductive bias of models towards "memorizing" fewer examples can cause over parameterization to hurt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-09T01:59:13Z)

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.