MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970615870 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.00937

Preventing Gradient Attenuation in Lipschitz Constrained Convolutional Networks

2019· article· en· W2970615870 on OpenAlexaff
Qiyang Li, Saminul Haque, Cem Anil, James Lucas, Roger Grosse

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLipschitz continuityRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceNorm (philosophy)Mathematical optimizationConvolution (computer science)AlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lipschitz constraints under L2 norm on deep neural networks are useful for provable adversarial robustness bounds, stable training, and Wasserstein distance estimation. While heuristic approaches such as the gradient penalty have seen much practical success, it is challenging to achieve similar practical performance while provably enforcing a Lipschitz constraint. In principle, one can design Lipschitz constrained architectures using the composition property of Lipschitz functions, but Anil et al. recently identified a key obstacle to this approach: gradient norm attenuation. They showed how to circumvent this problem in the case of fully connected networks by designing each layer to be gradient norm preserving. We extend their approach to train scalable, expressive, provably Lipschitz convolutional networks. In particular, we present the Block Convolution Orthogonal Parameterization (BCOP), an expressive parameterization of orthogonal convolution operations. We show that even though the space of orthogonal convolutions is disconnected, the largest connected component of BCOP with 2n channels can represent arbitrary BCOP convolutions over n channels. Our BCOP parameterization allows us to train large convolutional networks with provable Lipschitz bounds. Empirically, we find that it is competitive with existing approaches to provable adversarial robustness and Wasserstein distance estimation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.150 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningFrench-language works237,207