An Information-Theoretic Framework for Out-of-Distribution Generalization With Applications to Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the Out-of-Distribution (OOD) generalization in machine learning and propose a general framework that establishes information-theoretic generalization bounds. Our framework interpolates freely between Integral Probability Metric (IPM) andf-divergence, which naturally recovers some known results (including Wasserstein- and KL-bounds), as well as yields new generalization bounds. Additionally, we show that our framework admits an optimal transport interpretation. When evaluated in two concrete examples, the proposed bounds either strictly improve upon existing bounds in some cases or match the best existing OOD generalization bounds. Moreover, by focusing onf-divergence and combining it with the Conditional Mutual Information (CMI) methods, we derive a family of CMI-based generalization bounds, which include the state-of-the-art ICIMI bound as a special instance. Finally, leveraging these findings, we analyze the generalization of the Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics (SGLD) algorithm, showing that our derived generalization bounds outperform existing information-theoretic generalization bounds in certain 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 | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".