-
Do deep neural networks have an inbuilt Occam's razor?
Authors:
Chris Mingard,
Henry Rees,
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
The remarkable performance of overparameterized deep neural networks (DNNs) must arise from an interplay between network architecture, training algorithms, and structure in the data. To disentangle these three components, we apply a Bayesian picture, based on the functions expressed by a DNN, to supervised learning. The prior over functions is determined by the network, and is varied by exploiting…
▽ More
The remarkable performance of overparameterized deep neural networks (DNNs) must arise from an interplay between network architecture, training algorithms, and structure in the data. To disentangle these three components, we apply a Bayesian picture, based on the functions expressed by a DNN, to supervised learning. The prior over functions is determined by the network, and is varied by exploiting a transition between ordered and chaotic regimes. For Boolean function classification, we approximate the likelihood using the error spectrum of functions on data. When combined with the prior, this accurately predicts the posterior, measured for DNNs trained with stochastic gradient descent. This analysis reveals that structured data, combined with an intrinsic Occam's razor-like inductive bias towards (Kolmogorov) simple functions that is strong enough to counteract the exponential growth of the number of functions with complexity, is a key to the success of DNNs.
△ Less
Submitted 13 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
Double-descent curves in neural networks: a new perspective using Gaussian processes
Authors:
Ouns El Harzli,
Bernardo Cuenca Grau,
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
Double-descent curves in neural networks describe the phenomenon that the generalisation error initially descends with increasing parameters, then grows after reaching an optimal number of parameters which is less than the number of data points, but then descends again in the overparameterized regime. In this paper, we use techniques from random matrix theory to characterize the spectral distribut…
▽ More
Double-descent curves in neural networks describe the phenomenon that the generalisation error initially descends with increasing parameters, then grows after reaching an optimal number of parameters which is less than the number of data points, but then descends again in the overparameterized regime. In this paper, we use techniques from random matrix theory to characterize the spectral distribution of the empirical feature covariance matrix as a width-dependent perturbation of the spectrum of the neural network Gaussian process (NNGP) kernel, thus establishing a novel connection between the NNGP literature and the random matrix theory literature in the context of neural networks. Our analytical expression allows us to study the generalisation behavior of the corresponding kernel and GP regression, and provides a new interpretation of the double-descent phenomenon, namely as governed by the discrepancy between the width-dependent empirical kernel and the width-independent NNGP kernel.
△ Less
Submitted 25 May, 2023; v1 submitted 14 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Generalization bounds for deep learning
Authors:
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
Generalization in deep learning has been the topic of much recent theoretical and empirical research. Here we introduce desiderata for techniques that predict generalization errors for deep learning models in supervised learning. Such predictions should 1) scale correctly with data complexity; 2) scale correctly with training set size; 3) capture differences between architectures; 4) capture diffe…
▽ More
Generalization in deep learning has been the topic of much recent theoretical and empirical research. Here we introduce desiderata for techniques that predict generalization errors for deep learning models in supervised learning. Such predictions should 1) scale correctly with data complexity; 2) scale correctly with training set size; 3) capture differences between architectures; 4) capture differences between optimization algorithms; 5) be quantitatively not too far from the true error (in particular, be non-vacuous); 6) be efficiently computable; and 7) be rigorous. We focus on generalization error upper bounds, and introduce a categorisation of bounds depending on assumptions on the algorithm and data. We review a wide range of existing approaches, from classical VC dimension to recent PAC-Bayesian bounds, commenting on how well they perform against the desiderata.
We next use a function-based picture to derive a marginal-likelihood PAC-Bayesian bound. This bound is, by one definition, optimal up to a multiplicative constant in the asymptotic limit of large training sets, as long as the learning curve follows a power law, which is typically found in practice for deep learning problems. Extensive empirical analysis demonstrates that our marginal-likelihood PAC-Bayes bound fulfills desiderata 1-3 and 5. The results for 6 and 7 are promising, but not yet fully conclusive, while only desideratum 4 is currently beyond the scope of our bound. Finally, we comment on why this function-based bound performs significantly better than current parameter-based PAC-Bayes bounds.
△ Less
Submitted 9 December, 2020; v1 submitted 7 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
-
Is SGD a Bayesian sampler? Well, almost
Authors:
Chris Mingard,
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
Joar Skalse,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
Overparameterised deep neural networks (DNNs) are highly expressive and so can, in principle, generate almost any function that fits a training dataset with zero error. The vast majority of these functions will perform poorly on unseen data, and yet in practice DNNs often generalise remarkably well. This success suggests that a trained DNN must have a strong inductive bias towards functions with l…
▽ More
Overparameterised deep neural networks (DNNs) are highly expressive and so can, in principle, generate almost any function that fits a training dataset with zero error. The vast majority of these functions will perform poorly on unseen data, and yet in practice DNNs often generalise remarkably well. This success suggests that a trained DNN must have a strong inductive bias towards functions with low generalisation error. Here we empirically investigate this inductive bias by calculating, for a range of architectures and datasets, the probability $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ that an overparameterised DNN, trained with stochastic gradient descent (SGD) or one of its variants, converges on a function $f$ consistent with a training set $S$. We also use Gaussian processes to estimate the Bayesian posterior probability $P_B(f\mid S)$ that the DNN expresses $f$ upon random sampling of its parameters, conditioned on $S$.
Our main findings are that $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ correlates remarkably well with $P_B(f\mid S)$ and that $P_B(f\mid S)$ is strongly biased towards low-error and low complexity functions. These results imply that strong inductive bias in the parameter-function map (which determines $P_B(f\mid S)$), rather than a special property of SGD, is the primary explanation for why DNNs generalise so well in the overparameterised regime.
While our results suggest that the Bayesian posterior $P_B(f\mid S)$ is the first order determinant of $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$, there remain second order differences that are sensitive to hyperparameter tuning. A function probability picture, based on $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ and/or $P_B(f\mid S)$, can shed new light on the way that variations in architecture or hyperparameter settings such as batch size, learning rate, and optimiser choice, affect DNN performance.
△ Less
Submitted 24 October, 2020; v1 submitted 26 June, 2020;
originally announced June 2020.
-
Neural networks are a priori biased towards Boolean functions with low entropy
Authors:
Chris Mingard,
Joar Skalse,
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
David Martínez-Rubio,
Vladimir Mikulik,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
Understanding the inductive bias of neural networks is critical to explaining their ability to generalise. Here, for one of the simplest neural networks -- a single-layer perceptron with n input neurons, one output neuron, and no threshold bias term -- we prove that upon random initialisation of weights, the a priori probability $P(t)$ that it represents a Boolean function that classifies t points…
▽ More
Understanding the inductive bias of neural networks is critical to explaining their ability to generalise. Here, for one of the simplest neural networks -- a single-layer perceptron with n input neurons, one output neuron, and no threshold bias term -- we prove that upon random initialisation of weights, the a priori probability $P(t)$ that it represents a Boolean function that classifies t points in ${0,1}^n$ as 1 has a remarkably simple form: $P(t) = 2^{-n}$ for $0\leq t < 2^n$.
Since a perceptron can express far fewer Boolean functions with small or large values of t (low entropy) than with intermediate values of t (high entropy) there is, on average, a strong intrinsic a-priori bias towards individual functions with low entropy. Furthermore, within a class of functions with fixed t, we often observe a further intrinsic bias towards functions of lower complexity. Finally, we prove that, regardless of the distribution of inputs, the bias towards low entropy becomes monotonically stronger upon adding ReLU layers, and empirically show that increasing the variance of the bias term has a similar effect.
△ Less
Submitted 2 January, 2020; v1 submitted 25 September, 2019;
originally announced September 2019.
-
Deep learning generalizes because the parameter-function map is biased towards simple functions
Authors:
Guillermo Valle-Pérez,
Chico Q. Camargo,
Ard A. Louis
Abstract:
Deep neural networks (DNNs) generalize remarkably well without explicit regularization even in the strongly over-parametrized regime where classical learning theory would instead predict that they would severely overfit. While many proposals for some kind of implicit regularization have been made to rationalise this success, there is no consensus for the fundamental reason why DNNs do not strongly…
▽ More
Deep neural networks (DNNs) generalize remarkably well without explicit regularization even in the strongly over-parametrized regime where classical learning theory would instead predict that they would severely overfit. While many proposals for some kind of implicit regularization have been made to rationalise this success, there is no consensus for the fundamental reason why DNNs do not strongly overfit. In this paper, we provide a new explanation. By applying a very general probability-complexity bound recently derived from algorithmic information theory (AIT), we argue that the parameter-function map of many DNNs should be exponentially biased towards simple functions. We then provide clear evidence for this strong simplicity bias in a model DNN for Boolean functions, as well as in much larger fully connected and convolutional networks applied to CIFAR10 and MNIST. As the target functions in many real problems are expected to be highly structured, this intrinsic simplicity bias helps explain why deep networks generalize well on real world problems. This picture also facilitates a novel PAC-Bayes approach where the prior is taken over the DNN input-output function space, rather than the more conventional prior over parameter space. If we assume that the training algorithm samples parameters close to uniformly within the zero-error region then the PAC-Bayes theorem can be used to guarantee good expected generalization for target functions producing high-likelihood training sets. By exploiting recently discovered connections between DNNs and Gaussian processes to estimate the marginal likelihood, we produce relatively tight generalization PAC-Bayes error bounds which correlate well with the true error on realistic datasets such as MNIST and CIFAR10 and for architectures including convolutional and fully connected networks.
△ Less
Submitted 21 April, 2019; v1 submitted 22 May, 2018;
originally announced May 2018.
