A model of double descent for high-dimensional binary linear classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We consider a model for logistic regression where only a subset of features of size $p$ is used for training a linear classifier over $n$ training samples. The classifier is obtained by running gradient descent on logistic loss. For this model, we investigate the dependence of the classification error on the ratio $\kappa =p/n$. First, building on known deterministic results on the implicit bias of gradient descent, we uncover a phase-transition phenomenon for the case of Gaussian features: the classification error of the gradient descent solution is the same as that of the maximum-likelihood solution when $\kappa <\kappa _\star $, and that of the support vector machine when $\kappa>\kappa _\star $, where $\kappa _\star $ is a phase-transition threshold. Next, using the convex Gaussian min–max theorem, we sharply characterize the performance of both the maximum-likelihood and the support vector machine solutions. Combining these results, we obtain curves that explicitly characterize the classification error for varying values of $\kappa $. The numerical results validate the theoretical predictions and unveil double-descent phenomena that complement similar recent findings in linear regression settings as well as empirical observations in more complex learning scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".