Generalization Error of the Tilted Empirical Risk

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.19431v2
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:23:07 GMT
• Title: Generalization Error of the Tilted Empirical Risk
• Authors: Gholamali Aminian, Amir R. Asadi, Tian Li, Ahmad Beirami, Gesine Reinert, Samuel N. Cohen,
• Abstract summary: The generalization error (risk) of a supervised statistical learning algorithm quantifies its prediction ability on previously unseen data. Inspired by exponential tilting, Li et al. (2021) proposed the tilted empirical risk as a non-linear risk metric for machine learning applications.
• Score: 17.48212403081267
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The generalization error (risk) of a supervised statistical learning algorithm quantifies its prediction ability on previously unseen data. Inspired by exponential tilting, Li et al. (2021) proposed the tilted empirical risk as a non-linear risk metric for machine learning applications such as classification and regression problems. In this work, we examine the generalization error of the tilted empirical risk. In particular, we provide uniform and information-theoretic bounds on the tilted generalization error, defined as the difference between the population risk and the tilted empirical risk, with a convergence rate of $O(1/\sqrt{n})$ where $n$ is the number of training samples. Furthermore, we study the solution to the KL-regularized expected tilted empirical risk minimization problem and derive an upper bound on the expected tilted generalization error with a convergence rate of $O(1/n)$.

Related papers

• Data-driven decision-making under uncertainty with entropic risk measure [5.407319151576265]
  The entropic risk measure is widely used in high-stakes decision making to account for tail risks associated with an uncertain loss. To debias the empirical entropic risk estimator, we propose a strongly consistent bootstrapping procedure. We show that cross validation methods can result in significantly higher out-of-sample risk for the insurer if the bias in validation performance is not corrected for.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T04:02:52Z)
• Error Bounds of Supervised Classification from Information-Theoretic Perspective [0.0]
  We explore bounds on the expected risk when using deep neural networks for supervised classification from an information theoretic perspective. We introduce model risk and fitting error, which are derived from further decomposing the empirical risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T01:07:35Z)
• Model-Based Epistemic Variance of Values for Risk-Aware Policy Optimization [59.758009422067]
  We consider the problem of quantifying uncertainty over expected cumulative rewards in model-based reinforcement learning. We propose a new uncertainty Bellman equation (UBE) whose solution converges to the true posterior variance over values. We introduce a general-purpose policy optimization algorithm, Q-Uncertainty Soft Actor-Critic (QU-SAC) that can be applied for either risk-seeking or risk-averse policy optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-07T15:55:58Z)
• Non-Asymptotic Bounds for Adversarial Excess Risk under Misspecified Models [9.65010022854885]
  We show that adversarial risk is equivalent to the risk induced by a distributional adversarial attack under certain smoothness conditions. To evaluate the generalization performance of the adversarial estimator, we study the adversarial excess risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:51:19Z)
• Domain Generalization without Excess Empirical Risk [83.26052467843725]
  A common approach is designing a data-driven surrogate penalty to capture generalization and minimize the empirical risk jointly with the penalty. We argue that a significant failure mode of this recipe is an excess risk due to an erroneous penalty or hardness in joint optimization. We present an approach that eliminates this problem. Instead of jointly minimizing empirical risk with the penalty, we minimize the penalty under the constraint of optimality of the empirical risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T08:46:46Z)
• Mean-field Analysis of Generalization Errors [1.1344265020822928]
  We consider the KL-regularized empirical risk minimization problem and establish generic conditions under which the generalization error convergence rate, when training on a sample of size $n$, is $mathcalO (1/n)$. In the context of supervised learning with a one-hidden layer neural network in the mean-field regime, these conditions are reflected in suitable integrability and regularity assumptions on the loss and activation functions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-20T15:49:09Z)
• A Generalized Unbiased Risk Estimator for Learning with Augmented Classes [70.20752731393938]
  Given unlabeled data, an unbiased risk estimator (URE) can be derived, which can be minimized for LAC with theoretical guarantees. We propose a generalized URE that can be equipped with arbitrary loss functions while maintaining the theoretical guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T06:52:04Z)
• Prediction Risk and Estimation Risk of the Ridgeless Least Squares Estimator under General Assumptions on Regression Errors [10.857775300638831]
  We explore prediction risk as well as estimation risk under more general regression error assumptions. Our findings suggest that the benefits of over parameterization can extend to time series, panel and grouped data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T10:04:20Z)
• Mitigating multiple descents: A model-agnostic framework for risk monotonization [84.6382406922369]
  We develop a general framework for risk monotonization based on cross-validation. We propose two data-driven methodologies, namely zero- and one-step, that are akin to bagging and boosting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T17:41:40Z)
• Learning Bounds for Risk-sensitive Learning [86.50262971918276]
  In risk-sensitive learning, one aims to find a hypothesis that minimizes a risk-averse (or risk-seeking) measure of loss. We study the generalization properties of risk-sensitive learning schemes whose optimand is described via optimized certainty equivalents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-15T05:25:02Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating the Tradeoff Between Robustness and Accuracy [88.51943635427709]
  Adversarial training augments the training set with perturbations to improve the robust error. We show that the standard error could increase even when the augmented perturbations have noiseless observations from the optimal linear predictor.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-25T08:03:01Z)

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.