We compare classification and regression tasks in the overparameterized linear model with Gaussian features. On the one hand, we show that with sufficient overparameterization all training points are support vectors: solutions obtained by least-squares minimum-norm interpolation, typically used for regression, are identical to those produced by the hard-margin support vector machine (SVM) that minimizes the hinge loss, typically used for training classifiers. On the other hand, we show that there exist regimes where these solutions are near-optimal when evaluated by the 0 − 1 test loss function, but do not generalize if evaluated by the square loss function, i.e. they achieve the null risk. Our results demonstrate the very different roles and properties of loss functions used at the training phase (optimization) and the testing phase (generalization). * indicates equal contribution. The key results were unveiled at the ITA workshop in San Diego in Feb 2020. 1 See, e.g., Section 8.1.2 in [19] for a representative informal discussion and [47,3] for theoretical analyses.
Recent work shows unequal performance of commercial face classification services in the gender classification task across intersectional groups defined by skin type and gender. Accuracy on dark-skinned females is significantly worse than on any other group. In this paper, we conduct several analyses to try to uncover the reason for this gap. The main finding, perhaps surprisingly, is that skin type is not the driver. This conclusion is reached via stability experiments that vary an image's skin type via colortheoretic methods, namely luminance mode-shift and optimal transport. A second suspect, hair length, is also shown not to be the driver via experiments on face images cropped to exclude the hair. Finally, using contrastive post-hoc explanation techniques for neural networks, we bring forth evidence suggesting that differences in lip, eye and cheek structure across ethnicity lead to the differences. Further, lip and eye makeup are seen as strong predictors for a female face, which is a troubling propagation of a gender stereotype.
The rapid recent progress in machine learning (ML) has raised a number of scientific questions that challenge the longstanding dogma of the field. One of the most important riddles is the good empirical generalization of overparameterized models. Overparameterized models are excessively complex with respect to the size of the training dataset, which results in them perfectly fitting (i.e., interpolating) the training data, which is usually noisy. Such interpolation of noisy data is traditionally associated with detrimental overfitting, and yet a wide range of interpolating models -from simple linear models to deep neural networks -have recently been observed to generalize extremely well on fresh test data. Indeed, the recently discovered double descent phenomenon has revealed that highly overparameterized models often improve over the best underparameterized model in test performance.Understanding learning in this overparameterized regime requires new theory and foundational empirical studies, even for the simplest case of the linear model. The underpinnings of this understanding have been laid in very recent analyses of overparameterized linear regression and related statistical learning tasks, which resulted in precise analytic characterizations of double descent. This paper provides a succinct overview of this emerging theory of overparameterized ML (henceforth abbreviated as TOPML) that explains these recent findings through a statistical signal processing perspective. We emphasize the unique aspects that define the TOPML research area as a subfield of modern ML theory and outline interesting open questions that remain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.