Provable limitations of deep learning

December 16, 2018 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› arXiv.org

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Emmanuel Abbe, Colin Sandon arXiv ID 1812.06369 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.CC, cs.IT, stat.ML Citations 46 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 6 months ago
Abstract
As the success of deep learning reaches more grounds, one would like to also envision the potential limits of deep learning. This paper gives a first set of results proving that certain deep learning algorithms fail at learning certain efficiently learnable functions. The results put forward a notion of cross-predictability that characterizes when such failures take place. Parity functions provide an extreme example with a cross-predictability that decays exponentially, while a mere super-polynomial decay of the cross-predictability is shown to be sufficient to obtain failures. Examples in community detection and arithmetic learning are also discussed. Recall that it is known that the class of neural networks (NNs) with polynomial network size can express any function that can be implemented in polynomial time, and that their sample complexity scales polynomially with the network size. The challenge is with the optimization error (the ERM is NP-hard), and the success behind deep learning is to train deep NNs with descent algorithms. The failures shown in this paper apply to training poly-size NNs on function distributions of low cross-predictability with a descent algorithm that is either run with limited memory per sample or that is initialized and run with enough randomness. We further claim that such types of constraints are necessary to obtain failures, in that exact SGD with careful non-random initialization can be shown to learn parities. The cross-predictability in our results plays a similar role the statistical dimension in statistical query (SQ) algorithms, with distinctions explained in the paper. The proof techniques are based on exhibiting algorithmic constraints that imply a statistical indistinguishability between the algorithm's output on the test model v.s.\ a null model, using information measures to bound the total variation distance.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted