Efficient Cross-Validation for Semi-Supervised Learning

Manifold regularization, such as laplacian regularized least squares (LapRLS) and laplacian support vector machine (LapSVM), has been widely used in semi-supervised learning, and its performance greatly depends on the choice of some hyper-parameters. Cross-validation (CV) is the most popular approach for selecting the optimal hyper-parameters, but it has high complexity due to multiple times of learner training. In this paper, we provide a method to approximate the CV for manifold regularization based on a notion of robust statistics, called Bouligand influence function (BIF). We first provide a strategy for approximating the CV via the Taylor expansion of BIF. Then, we show how to calculate the BIF for general loss function,and further give the approximate CV criteria for model selection in manifold regularization. The proposed approximate CV for manifold regularization requires training only once, hence can significantly improve the efficiency of traditional CV. Experimental results show that our approximate CV has no statistical discrepancy with the original one, but much smaller time cost

Interpreting Robust Optimization via Adversarial Influence Functions

Robust optimization has been widely used in nowadays data science, especially in adversarial training. However, little research has been done to quantify how robust optimization changes the optimizers and the prediction losses comparing to standard training. In this paper, inspired by the influence function in robust statistics, we introduce the Adversarial Influence Function (AIF) as a tool to investigate the solution produced by robust optimization. The proposed AIF enjoys a closed-form and can be calculated efficiently. To illustrate the usage of AIF, we apply it to study model sensitivity -- a quantity defined to capture the change of prediction losses on the natural data after implementing robust optimization. We use AIF to analyze how model complexity and randomized smoothing affect the model sensitivity with respect to specific models. We further derive AIF for kernel regressions, with a particular application to neural tangent kernels, and experimentally demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed AIF. Lastly, the theories of AIF will be extended to distributional robust optimization

A Higher-Order Swiss Army Infinitesimal Jackknife

Cross validation (CV) and the bootstrap are ubiquitous model-agnostic tools for assessing the error or variability of machine learning and statistical estimators. However, these methods require repeatedly re-fitting the model with different weighted versions of the original dataset, which can be prohibitively time-consuming. For sufficiently regular optimization problems the optimum depends smoothly on the data weights, and so the process of repeatedly re-fitting can be approximated with a Taylor series that can be often evaluated relatively quickly. The first-order approximation is known as the "infinitesimal jackknife" in the statistics literature and has been the subject of recent interest in machine learning for approximate CV. In this work, we consider high-order approximations, which we call the "higher-order infinitesimal jackknife" (HOIJ). Under mild regularity conditions, we provide a simple recursive procedure to compute approximations of all orders with finite-sample accuracy bounds. Additionally, we show that the HOIJ can be efficiently computed even in high dimensions using forward-mode automatic differentiation. We show that a linear approximation with bootstrap weights approximation is equivalent to those provided by asymptotic normal approximations. Consequently, the HOIJ opens up the possibility of enjoying higher-order accuracy properties of the bootstrap using local approximations. Consistency of the HOIJ for leave-one-out CV under different asymptotic regimes follows as corollaries from our finite-sample bounds under additional regularity assumptions. The generality of the computation and bounds motivate the name "higher-order Swiss Army infinitesimal jackknife.

On the Accuracy of Influence Functions for Measuring Group Effects

Influence functions estimate the effect of removing a training point on a model without the need to retrain. They are based on a first-order Taylor approximation that is guaranteed to be accurate for sufficiently small changes to the model, and so are commonly used to study the effect of individual points in large datasets. However, we often want to study the effects of large groups of training points, e.g., to diagnose batch effects or apportion credit between different data sources. Removing such large groups can result in significant changes to the model. Are influence functions still accurate in this setting? In this paper, we find that across many different types of groups and for a range of real-world datasets, the predicted effect (using influence functions) of a group correlates surprisingly well with its actual effect, even if the absolute and relative errors are large. Our theoretical analysis shows that such strong correlation arises only under certain settings and need not hold in general, indicating that real-world datasets have particular properties that allow the influence approximation to be accurate