Posterior Differential Regularization with f-divergence for Improving Model Robustness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the problem of enhancing model robustness through regularization. Specifically, we focus on methods that regularize the model posterior difference between clean and noisy inputs. Theoretically, we provide a connection of two recent methods, Jacobian Regularization and Virtual Adversarial Training, under this framework. Additionally, we generalize the posterior differential regularization to the family of f-divergences and characterize the overall framework in terms of the Jacobian matrix. Empirically, we compare those regularizations and standard BERT training on a diverse set of tasks to provide a comprehensive profile of their effect on model generalization. For both fully supervised and semi-supervised settings, we show that regularizing the posterior difference with f-divergence can result in well-improved model robustness. In particular, with a proper f-divergence, a BERT-base model can achieve comparable generalization as its BERT-large counterpart for in-domain, adversarial and domain shift scenarios, indicating the great potential of the proposed framework for enhancing NLP model robustness.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 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 teacher head, 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".