new

Get trending papers in your email inbox!

Subscribe

Daily Papers

byAK and the research community

Jul 27

On the Equivalence between Neural Network and Support Vector Machine

Recent research shows that the dynamics of an infinitely wide neural network (NN) trained by gradient descent can be characterized by Neural Tangent Kernel (NTK) jacot2018neural. Under the squared loss, the infinite-width NN trained by gradient descent with an infinitely small learning rate is equivalent to kernel regression with NTK arora2019exact. However, the equivalence is only known for ridge regression currently arora2019harnessing, while the equivalence between NN and other kernel machines (KMs), e.g. support vector machine (SVM), remains unknown. Therefore, in this work, we propose to establish the equivalence between NN and SVM, and specifically, the infinitely wide NN trained by soft margin loss and the standard soft margin SVM with NTK trained by subgradient descent. Our main theoretical results include establishing the equivalences between NNs and a broad family of ell_2 regularized KMs with finite-width bounds, which cannot be handled by prior work, and showing that every finite-width NN trained by such regularized loss functions is approximately a KM. Furthermore, we demonstrate our theory can enable three practical applications, including (i) non-vacuous generalization bound of NN via the corresponding KM; (ii) non-trivial robustness certificate for the infinite-width NN (while existing robustness verification methods would provide vacuous bounds); (iii) intrinsically more robust infinite-width NNs than those from previous kernel regression. Our code for the experiments is available at https://github.com/leslie-CH/equiv-nn-svm.

  • 4 authors
·
Nov 11, 2021

Incremental Sheaf Cohomology on Cellular Complexes: O(1)-in-n Lazy Edit Processing under Bounded Local Geometry

We present an algorithmic framework for incremental maintenance of first sheaf cohomology H^1(X; F) on dynamically evolving 1-dimensional cellular complexes equipped with finite-dimensional cellular sheaves. The classical computation of H^1 via factorization of the coboundary matrix requires O(n^3) time; when the complex evolves with a stream of m edits, full recomputation after each edit costs O(mn^3). Under a bounded local geometry assumption -- bounded cell size v_{max}, bounded stalk dimension d, and bounded nerve degree D -- each edit (vertex insertion, edge insertion, restriction map update) affects only a bounded set of local coboundary blocks. The algorithm therefore processes lazy streaming edits in O(1) time with respect to the total complex size n (with cost polynomial in the local geometry parameters v_{max}, d, and D, which are treated as constants independent of n), deferring local eigensolves and Mayer-Vietoris global assembly to synchronization points (Flush). At synchronization, the maintained state agrees with the corresponding batch assembly of the partitioned sheaf model; we observe zero measured drift in all batch-verified runs (through V = 10^6). We also give an amortized O(|E|) streaming construction for the cellular decomposition and discuss an adversarial algebraic-RAM barrier arguing that unpartitioned non-trivial sheaves (d geq 2, non-identity restriction maps) do not admit the same locality. Experiments on Barabasi-Albert graphs with up to 5 times 10^6 vertices and 1.7 times 10^7 streaming edits show 35 μs median lazy per-edit update latency (excluding flush); query time (global assembly at synchronization) is O(n) per flush in the implemented full-traversal path. Exact synchronization costs are reported separately.

  • 1 authors
·
Jun 5

Fantastic Generalization Measures are Nowhere to be Found

We study the notion of a generalization bound being uniformly tight, meaning that the difference between the bound and the population loss is small for all learning algorithms and all population distributions. Numerous generalization bounds have been proposed in the literature as potential explanations for the ability of neural networks to generalize in the overparameterized setting. However, in their paper ``Fantastic Generalization Measures and Where to Find Them,'' Jiang et al. (2020) examine more than a dozen generalization bounds, and show empirically that none of them are uniformly tight. This raises the question of whether uniformly-tight generalization bounds are at all possible in the overparameterized setting. We consider two types of generalization bounds: (1) bounds that may depend on the training set and the learned hypothesis (e.g., margin bounds). We prove mathematically that no such bound can be uniformly tight in the overparameterized setting; (2) bounds that may in addition also depend on the learning algorithm (e.g., stability bounds). For these bounds, we show a trade-off between the algorithm's performance and the bound's tightness. Namely, if the algorithm achieves good accuracy on certain distributions, then no generalization bound can be uniformly tight for it in the overparameterized setting. We explain how these formal results can, in our view, inform research on generalization bounds for neural networks, while stressing that other interpretations of these results are also possible.

  • 4 authors
·
Sep 24, 2023

The Price of Differential Privacy under Continual Observation

We study the accuracy of differentially private mechanisms in the continual release model. A continual release mechanism receives a sensitive dataset as a stream of T inputs and produces, after receiving each input, an accurate output on the obtained inputs. In contrast, a batch algorithm receives the data as one batch and produces a single output. We provide the first strong lower bounds on the error of continual release mechanisms. In particular, for two fundamental problems that are widely studied and used in the batch model, we show that the worst case error of every continual release algorithm is tilde Omega(T^{1/3}) times larger than that of the best batch algorithm. Previous work shows only a polylogarithimic (in T) gap between the worst case error achievable in these two models; further, for many problems, including the summation of binary attributes, the polylogarithmic gap is tight (Dwork et al., 2010; Chan et al., 2010). Our results show that problems closely related to summation -- specifically, those that require selecting the largest of a set of sums -- are fundamentally harder in the continual release model than in the batch model. Our lower bounds assume only that privacy holds for streams fixed in advance (the "nonadaptive" setting). However, we provide matching upper bounds that hold in a model where privacy is required even for adaptively selected streams. This model may be of independent interest.

  • 4 authors
·
Dec 1, 2021