A Modern Take on the Bias-Variance Tradeoff in Neural Networks

The bias-variance tradeoff tells us that as model complexity increases, bias falls and variances increases, leading to a U-shaped test error curve. However, recent empirical results with over-parameterized neural networks are marked by a striking absence of the classic U-shaped test error curve: test error keeps decreasing in wider networks. This suggests that there might not be a bias-variance tradeoff in neural networks with respect to network width, unlike was originally claimed by, e.g., Geman et al. (1992). Motivated by the shaky evidence used to support this claim in neural networks, we measure bias and variance in the modern setting. We find that both bias and variance can decrease as the number of parameters grows. To better understand this, we introduce a new decomposition of the variance to disentangle the effects of optimization and data sampling. We also provide theoretical analysis in a simplified setting that is consistent with our empirical findings

OCReP: An Optimally Conditioned Regularization for Pseudoinversion Based Neural Training

In this paper we consider the training of single hidden layer neural networks by pseudoinversion, which, in spite of its popularity, is sometimes affected by numerical instability issues. Regularization is known to be effective in such cases, so that we introduce, in the framework of Tikhonov regularization, a matricial reformulation of the problem which allows us to use the condition number as a diagnostic tool for identification of instability. By imposing well-conditioning requirements on the relevant matrices, our theoretical analysis allows the identification of an optimal value for the regularization parameter from the standpoint of stability. We compare with the value derived by cross-validation for overfitting control and optimisation of the generalization performance. We test our method for both regression and classification tasks. The proposed method is quite effective in terms of predictivity, often with some improvement on performance with respect to the reference cases considered. This approach, due to analytical determination of the regularization parameter, dramatically reduces the computational load required by many other techniques.Comment: Published on Neural Network

Popular Ensemble Methods: An Empirical Study

An ensemble consists of a set of individually trained classifiers (such as neural networks or decision trees) whose predictions are combined when classifying novel instances. Previous research has shown that an ensemble is often more accurate than any of the single classifiers in the ensemble. Bagging (Breiman, 1996c) and Boosting (Freund and Shapire, 1996; Shapire, 1990) are two relatively new but popular methods for producing ensembles. In this paper we evaluate these methods on 23 data sets using both neural networks and decision trees as our classification algorithm. Our results clearly indicate a number of conclusions. First, while Bagging is almost always more accurate than a single classifier, it is sometimes much less accurate than Boosting. On the other hand, Boosting can create ensembles that are less accurate than a single classifier -- especially when using neural networks. Analysis indicates that the performance of the Boosting methods is dependent on the characteristics of the data set being examined. In fact, further results show that Boosting ensembles may overfit noisy data sets, thus decreasing its performance. Finally, consistent with previous studies, our work suggests that most of the gain in an ensemble's performance comes in the first few classifiers combined; however, relatively large gains can be seen up to 25 classifiers when Boosting decision trees

Neural network ensembles: Evaluation of aggregation algorithms

Ensembles of artificial neural networks show improved generalization capabilities that outperform those of single networks. However, for aggregation to be effective, the individual networks must be as accurate and diverse as possible. An important problem is, then, how to tune the aggregate members in order to have an optimal compromise between these two conflicting conditions. We present here an extensive evaluation of several algorithms for ensemble construction, including new proposals and comparing them with standard methods in the literature. We also discuss a potential problem with sequential aggregation algorithms: the non-frequent but damaging selection through their heuristics of particularly bad ensemble members. We introduce modified algorithms that cope with this problem by allowing individual weighting of aggregate members. Our algorithms and their weighted modifications are favorably tested against other methods in the literature, producing a sensible improvement in performance on most of the standard statistical databases used as benchmarks.Comment: 35 pages, 2 figures, In press AI Journa