Under mild regularity conditions, gradient-based methods converge globally to a critical point in the single-loss setting. This is known to break down for vanilla gradient descent when moving to multi-loss optimization, but can we hope to build some algorithm with global guarantees? We negatively resolve this open problem by proving that desirable convergence properties cannot simultaneously hold for any algorithm. Our result has more to do with the existence of games with no satisfactory outcomes, than with algorithms per se. More explicitly we construct a two-player game with zero-sum interactions whose losses are both coercive and analytic, but whose only simultaneous critical point is a strict maximum. Any 'reasonable' algorithm, defined to avoid strict maxima, will therefore fail to converge. This is fundamentally different from single losses, where coercivity implies existence of a global minimum. Moreover, we prove that a wide range of existing gradient-based methods almost surely have bounded but non-convergent iterates in a constructed zero-sum game for suitably small learning rates. It nonetheless remains an open question whether such behavior can arise in high-dimensional games of interest to ML practitioners, such as GANs or multi-agent RL.
相關內容
Gradient descent can be surprisingly good at optimizing deep neural networks without overfitting and without explicit regularization. We find that the discrete steps of gradient descent implicitly regularize models by penalizing gradient descent trajectories that have large loss gradients. We call this Implicit Gradient Regularization (IGR) and we use backward error analysis to calculate the size of this regularization. We confirm empirically that implicit gradient regularization biases gradient descent toward flat minima, where test errors are small and solutions are robust to noisy parameter perturbations. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the implicit gradient regularization term can be used as an explicit regularizer, allowing us to control this gradient regularization directly. More broadly, our work indicates that backward error analysis is a useful theoretical approach to the perennial question of how learning rate, model size, and parameter regularization interact to determine the properties of overparameterized models optimized with gradient descent.
The present work proposes an extension of the third medium contact method for solving structural topology optimization problems that involve and exploit self-contact. A new regularization of the void region, which acts as the contact medium, makes the method suitable for cases with very large deformations. The proposed contact method is implemented in a second order topology optimization framework, which employs a coupled simultaneous solution of the mechanical, design update, and adjoint problems. All three problems are derived and presented in weak form, and discretized with finite elements of suitable order. The capabilities and accuracy of the developed method are demonstrated in a topology optimization problem for achieving a desired non-linear force-displacement path.
We propose a new monotone finite difference discretization for the variational $p$-Laplace operator, \[ \Delta_p u=\text{div}(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u), \] and present a convergent numerical scheme for related Dirichlet problems. The resulting nonlinear system is solved using two different methods: one based on Newton-Raphson and one explicit method. Finally, we exhibit some numerical simulations supporting our theoretical results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first monotone finite difference discretization of the variational $p$-Laplacian and also the first time that nonhomogeneous problems for this operator can be treated numerically with a finite difference scheme.
Off-policy evaluation (OPE) in reinforcement learning is notoriously difficult in long- and infinite-horizon settings due to diminishing overlap between behavior and target policies. In this paper, we study the role of Markovian and time-invariant structure in efficient OPE. We first derive the efficiency limits for OPE when one assumes each of these structures. This precisely characterizes the curse of horizon: in time-variant processes, OPE is only feasible in the near-on-policy setting, where behavior and target policies are sufficiently similar. But, in time-invariant Markov decision processes, our bounds show that truly-off-policy evaluation is feasible, even with only just one dependent trajectory, and provide the limits of how well we could hope to do. We develop a new estimator based on Double Reinforcement Learning (DRL) that leverages this structure for OPE. Our DRL estimator simultaneously uses estimated stationary density ratios and $q$-functions and remains efficient when both are estimated at slow, nonparametric rates and remains consistent when either is estimated consistently. We investigate these properties and the performance benefits of leveraging the problem structure for more efficient OPE.
We establish $L^2$-exponential convergence rate for three popular piecewise deterministic Markov processes for sampling: the randomized Hamiltonian Monte Carlo method, the zigzag process, and the bouncy particle sampler. Our analysis is based on a variational framework for hypocoercivity, which combines a Poincar\'{e}-type inequality in time-augmented state space and a standard $L^2$ energy estimate. Our analysis provides explicit convergence rate estimates, which are more quantitative than existing results.
Off-policy evaluation (OPE) is the task of estimating the expected reward of a given policy based on offline data previously collected under different policies. Therefore, OPE is a key step in applying reinforcement learning to real-world domains such as medical treatment, where interactive data collection is expensive or even unsafe. As the observed data tends to be noisy and limited, it is essential to provide rigorous uncertainty quantification, not just a point estimation, when applying OPE to make high stakes decisions. This work considers the problem of constructing non-asymptotic confidence intervals in infinite-horizon off-policy evaluation, which remains a challenging open question. We develop a practical algorithm through a primal-dual optimization-based approach, which leverages the kernel Bellman loss (KBL) of Feng et al.(2019) and a new martingale concentration inequality of KBL applicable to time-dependent data with unknown mixing conditions. Our algorithm makes minimum assumptions on the data and the function class of the Q-function, and works for the behavior-agnostic settings where the data is collected under a mix of arbitrary unknown behavior policies. We present empirical results that clearly demonstrate the advantages of our approach over existing methods.
We consider a PDE approach to numerically solving the optimal transportation problem on the sphere. We focus on both the traditional squared geodesic cost and a logarithmic cost, which arises in the reflector antenna design problem. At each point on the sphere, we replace the surface PDE with a generalized Monge-Amp\`ere type equation posed on the tangent plane using normal coordinates. The resulting nonlinear PDE can then be approximated by any consistent, monotone scheme for generalized Monge-Amp\`ere type equations on the plane. By augmenting this discretization with an additional term that constrains the solution gradient, we obtain a strong form of stability. A modification of the Barles-Souganidis convergence framework then establishes convergence to the mean-zero solution of the original PDE.
When and why can a neural network be successfully trained? This article provides an overview of optimization algorithms and theory for training neural networks. First, we discuss the issue of gradient explosion/vanishing and the more general issue of undesirable spectrum, and then discuss practical solutions including careful initialization and normalization methods. Second, we review generic optimization methods used in training neural networks, such as SGD, adaptive gradient methods and distributed methods, and theoretical results for these algorithms. Third, we review existing research on the global issues of neural network training, including results on bad local minima, mode connectivity, lottery ticket hypothesis and infinite-width analysis.
To make deliberate progress towards more intelligent and more human-like artificial systems, we need to be following an appropriate feedback signal: we need to be able to define and evaluate intelligence in a way that enables comparisons between two systems, as well as comparisons with humans. Over the past hundred years, there has been an abundance of attempts to define and measure intelligence, across both the fields of psychology and AI. We summarize and critically assess these definitions and evaluation approaches, while making apparent the two historical conceptions of intelligence that have implicitly guided them. We note that in practice, the contemporary AI community still gravitates towards benchmarking intelligence by comparing the skill exhibited by AIs and humans at specific tasks such as board games and video games. We argue that solely measuring skill at any given task falls short of measuring intelligence, because skill is heavily modulated by prior knowledge and experience: unlimited priors or unlimited training data allow experimenters to "buy" arbitrary levels of skills for a system, in a way that masks the system's own generalization power. We then articulate a new formal definition of intelligence based on Algorithmic Information Theory, describing intelligence as skill-acquisition efficiency and highlighting the concepts of scope, generalization difficulty, priors, and experience. Using this definition, we propose a set of guidelines for what a general AI benchmark should look like. Finally, we present a benchmark closely following these guidelines, the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC), built upon an explicit set of priors designed to be as close as possible to innate human priors. We argue that ARC can be used to measure a human-like form of general fluid intelligence and that it enables fair general intelligence comparisons between AI systems and humans.
Recent years have witnessed significant progresses in deep Reinforcement Learning (RL). Empowered with large scale neural networks, carefully designed architectures, novel training algorithms and massively parallel computing devices, researchers are able to attack many challenging RL problems. However, in machine learning, more training power comes with a potential risk of more overfitting. As deep RL techniques are being applied to critical problems such as healthcare and finance, it is important to understand the generalization behaviors of the trained agents. In this paper, we conduct a systematic study of standard RL agents and find that they could overfit in various ways. Moreover, overfitting could happen "robustly": commonly used techniques in RL that add stochasticity do not necessarily prevent or detect overfitting. In particular, the same agents and learning algorithms could have drastically different test performance, even when all of them achieve optimal rewards during training. The observations call for more principled and careful evaluation protocols in RL. We conclude with a general discussion on overfitting in RL and a study of the generalization behaviors from the perspective of inductive bias.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191