Can Machines Learn the True Probabilities?

Read original: arXiv:2407.05526 - Published 7/9/2024 by Jinsook Kim
Total Score

0

🌿

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • Investigates whether machines can learn the "true" probabilities underlying data
  • Explores theoretical limits on how well machines can estimate probabilities
  • Considers the impact of model complexity, computational resources, and data availability

Plain English Explanation

The paper investigates whether machines, such as machine learning models, can learn the "true" underlying probabilities that generate observed data. This is a fundamental question in the field of machine learning, as accurately estimating probabilities is crucial for many applications like language models and uncertainty quantification.

The paper explores the theoretical limits on how well machines can estimate these "true" probabilities, taking into account factors like the complexity of the probability distribution, the computational resources available, and the amount of data observed. It considers the implications for well-calibrated probability estimates and the potential for machines to learn the underlying "true" probabilities.

The key idea is to understand the fundamental limits on a machine's ability to learn the true probabilities, rather than just approximating them. This has important implications for the design and deployment of machine learning systems that rely on accurate probability estimates.

Technical Explanation

The paper investigates the theoretical limits on a machine's ability to learn the "true" probabilities underlying observed data. It considers a setting where the data is generated by some unknown probability distribution, and the goal is to estimate this distribution as accurately as possible using a machine learning model.

The paper analyzes the relationship between the complexity of the true probability distribution, the computational resources available to the machine, and the amount of data observed. It shows that there are fundamental limits on how well a machine can estimate the true probabilities, even with unlimited computational power and data.

Specifically, the paper establishes theoretical bounds on the accuracy of probability estimates based on the Kolmogorov complexity of the true distribution and the available computational resources. It also considers the impact of the data distribution and the potential for well-calibrated probability estimates.

The results provide insights into the challenges and limitations of using machine learning to learn the "true" probabilities underlying data, rather than just approximating them. This has important implications for the design and deployment of machine learning systems in applications that require accurate probability estimates, such as uncertainty quantification and decision-making under uncertainty.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a rigorous theoretical analysis of the fundamental limits on a machine's ability to learn the "true" probabilities underlying observed data. However, it is important to note that the analysis relies on several assumptions, such as the availability of unlimited computational resources and the existence of a "true" underlying probability distribution.

In practice, the complexity of real-world data and the constraints on computational resources may introduce additional challenges that are not fully captured by the theoretical analysis. Additionally, the paper does not address the potential impact of factors like data quality, feature engineering, and model architecture on the ability to learn accurate probabilities.

Further research may be needed to understand how these practical considerations affect the ability to learn true probabilities in real-world applications. Exploring the trade-offs between computational complexity, data availability, and the accuracy of probability estimates could also provide valuable insights.

Conclusion

This paper provides a valuable theoretical analysis of the limits on a machine's ability to learn the "true" probabilities underlying observed data. It highlights the fundamental challenges associated with accurate probability estimation, even with unlimited computational resources and data.

The insights from this research can inform the design and deployment of machine learning systems that rely on accurate probability estimates, such as those used for uncertainty quantification and decision-making under uncertainty. By understanding the theoretical limits, researchers and practitioners can develop more robust and reliable machine learning models that can better account for the inherent uncertainty in real-world data.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

🌿

Total Score

0

Can Machines Learn the True Probabilities?

Jinsook Kim

When there exists uncertainty, AI machines are designed to make decisions so as to reach the best expected outcomes. Expectations are based on true facts about the objective environment the machines interact with, and those facts can be encoded into AI models in the form of true objective probability functions. Accordingly, AI models involve probabilistic machine learning in which the probabilities should be objectively interpreted. We prove under some basic assumptions when machines can learn the true objective probabilities, if any, and when machines cannot learn them.

Read more

7/9/2024

⚙️

Total Score

0

A Theory of Machine Learning

Jinsook Kim, Jinho Kang

We critically review three major theories of machine learning and provide a new theory according to which machines learn a function when the machines successfully compute it. We show that this theory challenges common assumptions in the statistical and the computational learning theories, for it implies that learning true probabilities is equivalent neither to obtaining a correct calculation of the true probabilities nor to obtaining an almost-sure convergence to them. We also briefly discuss some case studies from natural language processing and macroeconomics from the perspective of the new theory.

Read more

7/9/2024

💬

Total Score

0

What Are the Odds? Language Models Are Capable of Probabilistic Reasoning

Akshay Paruchuri, Jake Garrison, Shun Liao, John Hernandez, Jacob Sunshine, Tim Althoff, Xin Liu, Daniel McDuff

Language models (LM) are capable of remarkably complex linguistic tasks; however, numerical reasoning is an area in which they frequently struggle. An important but rarely evaluated form of reasoning is understanding probability distributions. In this paper, we focus on evaluating the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of LMs using idealized and real-world statistical distributions. We perform a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LMs on three tasks: estimating percentiles, drawing samples, and calculating probabilities. We evaluate three ways to provide context to LMs 1) anchoring examples from within a distribution or family of distributions, 2) real-world context, 3) summary statistics on which to base a Normal approximation. Models can make inferences about distributions, and can be further aided by the incorporation of real-world context, example shots and simplified assumptions, even if these assumptions are incorrect or misspecified. To conduct this work, we developed a comprehensive benchmark distribution dataset with associated question-answer pairs that we will release publicly.

Read more

6/19/2024

Can a Bayesian Oracle Prevent Harm from an Agent?
Total Score

0

Can a Bayesian Oracle Prevent Harm from an Agent?

Yoshua Bengio, Michael K. Cohen, Nikolay Malkin, Matt MacDermott, Damiano Fornasiere, Pietro Greiner, Younesse Kaddar

Is there a way to design powerful AI systems based on machine learning methods that would satisfy probabilistic safety guarantees? With the long-term goal of obtaining a probabilistic guarantee that would apply in every context, we consider estimating a context-dependent bound on the probability of violating a given safety specification. Such a risk evaluation would need to be performed at run-time to provide a guardrail against dangerous actions of an AI. Noting that different plausible hypotheses about the world could produce very different outcomes, and because we do not know which one is right, we derive bounds on the safety violation probability predicted under the true but unknown hypothesis. Such bounds could be used to reject potentially dangerous actions. Our main results involve searching for cautious but plausible hypotheses, obtained by a maximization that involves Bayesian posteriors over hypotheses. We consider two forms of this result, in the iid case and in the non-iid case, and conclude with open problems towards turning such theoretical results into practical AI guardrails.

Read more

8/26/2024