An Axiomatic Approach to Loss Aggregation and an Adapted Aggregating Algorithm
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents an axiomatic approach to loss aggregation and an adapted aggregating algorithm.
- It introduces an Aggregating Algorithm, a type of online learning algorithm, and proposes adaptations to improve its performance.
- The paper provides a theoretical analysis of the properties and behavior of the Aggregating Algorithm.
Plain English Explanation
In the field of machine learning, researchers often work with multiple models or "experts" that make predictions. To combine the outputs of these experts, a common approach is to use an Aggregating Algorithm. This algorithm takes the predictions from the individual experts and produces a single, aggregated prediction.
The authors of this paper take a closer look at the Aggregating Algorithm. They develop a set of axiomatic properties that they believe a good aggregation method should satisfy. These properties include things like treating all experts equally and ensuring the aggregated prediction is a reasonable compromise between the individual predictions.
The paper then proposes an adapted version of the Aggregating Algorithm that aims to better satisfy these axiomatic properties. The authors analyze the theoretical behavior of their adapted algorithm and show that it has desirable properties, such as converging to the "best" expert over time.
Technical Explanation
The core of the paper is the authors' axiomatic approach to loss aggregation. They define a set of properties that they believe a good aggregation method should satisfy, such as:
- Symmetry: All experts should be treated equally.
- Monotonicity: If an expert's loss decreases, the aggregated loss should not increase.
- Continuity: Small changes in the experts' losses should result in small changes in the aggregated loss.
The authors then propose an adapted version of the Aggregating Algorithm that aims to better satisfy these axiomatic properties. Their adapted algorithm introduces a new parameter that controls the tradeoff between exploitation (following the best expert) and exploration (considering all experts).
The paper provides a theoretical analysis of the behavior of the adapted Aggregating Algorithm. The authors show that their algorithm converges to the "best" expert over time, meaning that it eventually assigns the highest weight to the expert with the lowest loss. They also prove that the algorithm satisfies the axiomatic properties they defined.
Critical Analysis
The authors present a thoughtful and rigorous approach to analyzing and improving the Aggregating Algorithm. Their axiomatic framework provides a clear set of principles for evaluating aggregation methods, which could be useful for researchers working on similar problems.
However, the paper does not address potential limitations or practical challenges in applying the adapted Aggregating Algorithm. For example, the algorithm may be sensitive to the choice of the new parameter, and its performance could be affected by factors like the number of experts, the distribution of their losses, and the level of noise in the data.
Additionally, the paper does not compare the adapted algorithm to other state-of-the-art aggregation methods or discuss its performance on real-world datasets. Further empirical evaluation would be helpful to assess the algorithm's practical advantages and drawbacks.
Conclusion
This paper presents an interesting and theoretically grounded approach to improving the Aggregating Algorithm, a commonly used method for combining the predictions of multiple machine learning models. The authors' axiomatic framework and adapted algorithm provide a solid foundation for further research in this area.
While the paper offers valuable insights, more work is needed to fully understand the practical implications and limitations of the proposed approach. Researchers and practitioners interested in loss aggregation and online learning algorithms may find this paper a useful starting point for further exploration and development.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
An Axiomatic Approach to Loss Aggregation and an Adapted Aggregating Algorithm
Armando J. Cabrera Pacheco, Rabanus Derr, Robert C. Williamson
Supervised learning has gone beyond the expected risk minimization framework. Central to most of these developments is the introduction of more general aggregation functions for losses incurred by the learner. In this paper, we turn towards online learning under expert advice. Via easily justified assumptions we characterize a set of reasonable loss aggregation functions as quasi-sums. Based upon this insight, we suggest a variant of the Aggregating Algorithm tailored to these more general aggregation functions. This variant inherits most of the nice theoretical properties of the AA, such as recovery of Bayes' updating and a time-independent bound on quasi-sum regret. Finally, we argue that generalized aggregations express the attitude of the learner towards losses.
Read more6/5/2024
0
A naive aggregation algorithm for improving generalization in a class of learning problems
Getachew K Befekadu
In this brief paper, we present a naive aggregation algorithm for a typical learning problem with expert advice setting, in which the task of improving generalization, i.e., model validation, is embedded in the learning process as a sequential decision-making problem. In particular, we consider a class of learning problem of point estimations for modeling high-dimensional nonlinear functions, where a group of experts update their parameter estimates using the discrete-time version of gradient systems, with small additive noise term, guided by the corresponding subsample datasets obtained from the original dataset. Here, our main objective is to provide conditions under which such an algorithm will sequentially determine a set of mixing distribution strategies used for aggregating the experts' estimates that ultimately leading to an optimal parameter estimate, i.e., as a consensus solution for all experts, which is better than any individual expert's estimate in terms of improved generalization or learning performances. Finally, as part of this work, we present some numerical results for a typical case of nonlinear regression problem.
Read more9/9/2024
0
On the Convergence of Loss and Uncertainty-based Active Learning Algorithms
Daniel Haimovich, Dima Karamshuk, Fridolin Linder, Niek Tax, Milan Vojnovic
We investigate the convergence rates and data sample sizes required for training a machine learning model using a stochastic gradient descent (SGD) algorithm, where data points are sampled based on either their loss value or uncertainty value. These training methods are particularly relevant for active learning and data subset selection problems. For SGD with a constant step size update, we present convergence results for linear classifiers and linearly separable datasets using squared hinge loss and similar training loss functions. Additionally, we extend our analysis to more general classifiers and datasets, considering a wide range of loss-based sampling strategies and smooth convex training loss functions. We propose a novel algorithm called Adaptive-Weight Sampling (AWS) that utilizes SGD with an adaptive step size that achieves stochastic Polyak's step size in expectation. We establish convergence rate results for AWS for smooth convex training loss functions. Our numerical experiments demonstrate the efficiency of AWS on various datasets by using either exact or estimated loss values.
Read more6/12/2024
🎲
0
Regularized Q-learning through Robust Averaging
Peter Schmitt-Forster, Tobias Sutter
We propose a new Q-learning variant, called 2RA Q-learning, that addresses some weaknesses of existing Q-learning methods in a principled manner. One such weakness is an underlying estimation bias which cannot be controlled and often results in poor performance. We propose a distributionally robust estimator for the maximum expected value term, which allows us to precisely control the level of estimation bias introduced. The distributionally robust estimator admits a closed-form solution such that the proposed algorithm has a computational cost per iteration comparable to Watkins' Q-learning. For the tabular case, we show that 2RA Q-learning converges to the optimal policy and analyze its asymptotic mean-squared error. Lastly, we conduct numerical experiments for various settings, which corroborate our theoretical findings and indicate that 2RA Q-learning often performs better than existing methods.
Read more5/30/2024