-
Ask Your Distribution Shift if Pre-Training is Right for You
Authors:
Benjamin Cohen-Wang,
Joshua Vendrow,
Aleksander Madry
Abstract:
Pre-training is a widely used approach to develop models that are robust to distribution shifts. However, in practice, its effectiveness varies: fine-tuning a pre-trained model improves robustness significantly in some cases but not at all in others (compared to training from scratch). In this work, we seek to characterize the failure modes that pre-training can and cannot address. In particular,…
▽ More
Pre-training is a widely used approach to develop models that are robust to distribution shifts. However, in practice, its effectiveness varies: fine-tuning a pre-trained model improves robustness significantly in some cases but not at all in others (compared to training from scratch). In this work, we seek to characterize the failure modes that pre-training can and cannot address. In particular, we focus on two possible failure modes of models under distribution shift: poor extrapolation (e.g., they cannot generalize to a different domain) and biases in the training data (e.g., they rely on spurious features). Our study suggests that, as a rule of thumb, pre-training can help mitigate poor extrapolation but not dataset biases. After providing theoretical motivation and empirical evidence for this finding, we explore two of its implications for developing robust models: (1) pre-training and interventions designed to prevent exploiting biases have complementary robustness benefits, and (2) fine-tuning on a (very) small, non-diverse but de-biased dataset can result in significantly more robust models than fine-tuning on a large and diverse but biased dataset. Code is available at https://github.com/MadryLab/pretraining-distribution-shift-robustness.
△ Less
Submitted 29 February, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Hot PATE: Private Aggregation of Distributions for Diverse Task
Authors:
Edith Cohen,
Benjamin Cohen-Wang,
Xin Lyu,
Jelani Nelson,
Tamas Sarlos,
Uri Stemmer
Abstract:
The Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles (PATE) framework is a versatile approach to privacy-preserving machine learning. In PATE, teacher models that are not privacy-preserving are trained on distinct portions of sensitive data. Privacy-preserving knowledge transfer to a student model is then facilitated by privately aggregating teachers' predictions on new examples. Employing PATE with gener…
▽ More
The Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles (PATE) framework is a versatile approach to privacy-preserving machine learning. In PATE, teacher models that are not privacy-preserving are trained on distinct portions of sensitive data. Privacy-preserving knowledge transfer to a student model is then facilitated by privately aggregating teachers' predictions on new examples. Employing PATE with generative auto-regressive models presents both challenges and opportunities. These models excel in open ended \emph{diverse} (aka hot) tasks with multiple valid responses. Moreover, the knowledge of models is often encapsulated in the response distribution itself and preserving this diversity is critical for fluid and effective knowledge transfer from teachers to student. In all prior designs, higher diversity resulted in lower teacher agreement and thus -- a tradeoff between diversity and privacy. Prior works with PATE thus focused on non-diverse settings or limiting diversity to improve utility.
We propose \emph{hot PATE}, a design tailored for the diverse setting. In hot PATE, each teacher model produces a response distribution that can be highly diverse. We mathematically model the notion of \emph{preserving diversity} and propose an aggregation method, \emph{coordinated ensembles}, that preserves privacy and transfers diversity with \emph{no penalty} to privacy or efficiency. We demonstrate empirically the benefits of hot PATE for in-context learning via prompts and potential to unleash more of the capabilities of generative models.
△ Less
Submitted 17 May, 2024; v1 submitted 4 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
Comparing the Value of Labeled and Unlabeled Data in Method-of-Moments Latent Variable Estimation
Authors:
Mayee F. Chen,
Benjamin Cohen-Wang,
Stephen Mussmann,
Frederic Sala,
Christopher Ré
Abstract:
Labeling data for modern machine learning is expensive and time-consuming. Latent variable models can be used to infer labels from weaker, easier-to-acquire sources operating on unlabeled data. Such models can also be trained using labeled data, presenting a key question: should a user invest in few labeled or many unlabeled points? We answer this via a framework centered on model misspecification…
▽ More
Labeling data for modern machine learning is expensive and time-consuming. Latent variable models can be used to infer labels from weaker, easier-to-acquire sources operating on unlabeled data. Such models can also be trained using labeled data, presenting a key question: should a user invest in few labeled or many unlabeled points? We answer this via a framework centered on model misspecification in method-of-moments latent variable estimation. Our core result is a bias-variance decomposition of the generalization error, which shows that the unlabeled-only approach incurs additional bias under misspecification. We then introduce a correction that provably removes this bias in certain cases. We apply our decomposition framework to three scenarios -- well-specified, misspecified, and corrected models -- to 1) choose between labeled and unlabeled data and 2) learn from their combination. We observe theoretically and with synthetic experiments that for well-specified models, labeled points are worth a constant factor more than unlabeled points. With misspecification, however, their relative value is higher due to the additional bias but can be reduced with correction. We also apply our approach to study real-world weak supervision techniques for dataset construction.
△ Less
Submitted 3 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
