MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991356711

Fast-rate PAC-Bayes Generalization Bounds via Shifted Rademacher Processes

2019· article· en· W2991356711 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Yang, Shengyang Sun, Daniel M. Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Information Processing Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayes' theoremBayesian probabilityComputer scienceGeneralizationMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The developments of Rademacher complexity and PAC-Bayesian theory have been largely independent. One exception is the PAC-Bayes theorem of Kakade, Sridharan, and Tewari (2008), which is established via Rademacher complexity theory by viewing Gibbs classifiers as linear operators. The goal of this paper is to extend this bridge between Rademacher complexity and state-of-the-art PAC-Bayesian theory. We first demonstrate that one can match the fast rate of Catoni's PAC-Bayes bounds (Catoni, 2007) using shifted Rademacher processes (Wegkamp, 2003; Lecue and Mitchell, 2012; Zhivotovskiy and Hanneke, 2018). We then derive a new fast-rate PAC-Bayes bound in terms of the flatness of the empirical risk surface on which the posterior concentrates. Our analysis establishes a new framework for deriving fast-rate PAC-Bayes bounds and yields new insights on PAC-Bayesian theory.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.015
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural Information Processing SystemsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207