The prescriptions of our two most prominent strands of decision theory, evidential and causal, differ in a general class of problems known as Newcomb problems. In these, evidential decision theory prescribes choosing a dominated act. Attempts have been made at reconciling the two theories by relying on additional requirements such as ratification (Jeffrey 1983) or "tickles" (Eells 1982). It has been argued that such attempts have failed (Lewis 1981a; Skyrms 1982). More recently, Huttegger (forthcoming) has developed a version of deliberative decision theory that reconciles the prescriptions of the evidentialist and causalist. In this paper, I extend this framework to problems characterised by decision instability, and show that it cannot deliver a resolute answer under a plausible specification of the tickle. I prove that there exists a robust method of determining whether the specification of the tickle matters for all two-state, two-act problems whose payoff tables exhibit some basic mathematical relationships. One upshot is that we have a principled way of knowing ex-ante whether a reconciliation of evidential and causal decision theory is plausible for a wide range of decision problems under this framework. Another upshot is that the tickle approach needs further work to achieve full reconciliation.
相關內容
Despite the importance of having a measure of confidence in recommendation results, it has been surprisingly overlooked in the literature compared to the accuracy of the recommendation. In this dissertation, I propose a model calibration framework for recommender systems for estimating accurate confidence in recommendation results based on the learned ranking scores. Moreover, I subsequently introduce two real-world applications of confidence on recommendations: (1) Training a small student model by treating the confidence of a big teacher model as additional learning guidance, (2) Adjusting the number of presented items based on the expected user utility estimated with calibrated probability.
We show the effectiveness of automatic differentiation in efficiently and correctly computing and controlling the spectrum of implicitly linear operators, a rich family of layer types including all standard convolutional and dense layers. We provide the first clipping method which is correct for general convolution layers, and illuminate the representational limitation that caused correctness issues in prior work. We study the effect of the batch normalization layers when concatenated with convolutional layers and show how our clipping method can be applied to their composition. By comparing the accuracy and performance of our algorithms to the state-of-the-art methods, using various experiments, we show they are more precise and efficient and lead to better generalization and adversarial robustness. We provide the code for using our methods at //github.com/Ali-E/FastClip.
Judgment aggregation is a framework to aggregate individual opinions on multiple, logically connected issues into a collective outcome. It is open to manipulative attacks such as \textsc{Manipulation} where judges cast their judgments strategically. Previous works have shown that most computational problems corresponding to these manipulative attacks are \NP-hard. This desired computational barrier, however, often relies on formulas that are either of unbounded size or of complex structure. We revisit the computational complexity for various \textsc{Manipulation} and \textsc{Bribery} problems in judgment aggregation, now focusing on simple and realistic formulas. We restrict all formulas to be clauses that are (positive) monotone, Horn-clauses, or have bounded length. For basic variants of \textsc{Manipulation}, we show that these restrictions make several variants, which were in general known to be \NP-hard, polynomial-time solvable. Moreover, we provide a P vs.\ NP dichotomy for a large class of clause restrictions (generalizing monotone and Horn clauses) by showing a close relationship between variants of \textsc{Manipulation} and variants of \textsc{Satisfiability}. For Hamming distance based \textsc{Manipulation}, we show that \NP-hardness even holds for positive monotone clauses of length three, but the problem becomes polynomial-time solvable for positive monotone clauses of length two. For \textsc{Bribery}, we show that \NP-hardness even holds for positive monotone clauses of length two, but it becomes polynomial-time solvable for the same clause set if there is a constant budget.
Rule-based reasoning, a fundamental type of legal reasoning, enables us to draw conclusions by accurately applying a rule to a set of facts. We explore causal language models as rule-based reasoners, specifically with respect to compositional rules - rules consisting of multiple elements which form a complex logical expression. Reasoning about compositional rules is challenging because it requires multiple reasoning steps, and attending to the logical relationships between elements. We introduce a new prompting method, Chain of Logic, which elicits rule-based reasoning through decomposition (solving elements as independent threads of logic), and recomposition (recombining these sub-answers to resolve the underlying logical expression). This method was inspired by the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) framework, a sequential reasoning approach used by lawyers. We evaluate chain of logic across eight rule-based reasoning tasks involving three distinct compositional rules from the LegalBench benchmark and demonstrate it consistently outperforms other prompting methods, including chain of thought and self-ask, using open-source and commercial language models.
Collaboration is crucial for reaching collective goals. However, its effectiveness is often undermined by the strategic behavior of individual agents -- a fact that is captured by a high Price of Stability (PoS) in recent literature [Blum et al., 2021]. Implicit in the traditional PoS analysis is the assumption that agents have full knowledge of how their tasks relate to one another. We offer a new perspective on bringing about efficient collaboration among strategic agents using information design. Inspired by the growing importance of collaboration in machine learning (such as platforms for collaborative federated learning and data cooperatives), we propose a framework where the platform has more information about how the agents' tasks relate to each other than the agents themselves. We characterize how and to what degree such platforms can leverage their information advantage to steer strategic agents toward efficient collaboration. Concretely, we consider collaboration networks where each node is a task type held by one agent, and each task benefits from contributions made in their inclusive neighborhood of tasks. This network structure is known to the agents and the platform, but only the platform knows each agent's real location -- from the agents' perspective, their location is determined by a random permutation. We employ private Bayesian persuasion and design two families of persuasive signaling schemes that the platform can use to ensure a small total workload when agents follow the signal. The first family aims to achieve the minmax optimal approximation ratio compared to the optimal collaboration, which is shown to be $\Theta(\sqrt{n})$ for unit-weight graphs, $\Theta(n^{2/3})$ for graphs with constant minimum edge weights, and $O(n^{3/4})$ for general weighted graphs. The second family ensures per-instance strict improvement compared to full information disclosure.
The ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to critique and refine their reasoning is crucial for their application in evaluation, feedback provision, and self-improvement. This paper introduces CriticBench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to assess LLMs' abilities to critique and rectify their reasoning across a variety of tasks. CriticBench encompasses five reasoning domains: mathematical, commonsense, symbolic, coding, and algorithmic. It compiles 15 datasets and incorporates responses from three LLM families. Utilizing CriticBench, we evaluate and dissect the performance of 17 LLMs in generation, critique, and correction reasoning, i.e., GQC reasoning. Our findings reveal: (1) a linear relationship in GQC capabilities, with critique-focused training markedly enhancing performance; (2) a task-dependent variation in correction effectiveness, with logic-oriented tasks being more amenable to correction; (3) GQC knowledge inconsistencies that decrease as model size increases; and (4) an intriguing inter-model critiquing dynamic, where stronger models are better at critiquing weaker ones, while weaker models can surprisingly surpass stronger ones in their self-critique. We hope these insights into the nuanced critique-correct reasoning of LLMs will foster further research in LLM critique and self-improvement.
We give a simple approximation algorithm for a common generalization of many previously studied extensions of the maximum size stable matching problem with ties. These generalizations include the existence of critical vertices in the graph, amongst whom we must match as much as possible, free edges, that cannot be blocking edges and $\Delta$-stabilities, which mean that for an edge to block, the improvement should be large enough on one or both sides. We also introduce other notions to generalize these even further, which allows our framework to capture many existing and future applications. We show that the edge duplicating technique allows us to treat these different types of generalizations simultaneously, while also making the algorithm, the proofs and the analysis much simpler and shorter than in previous approaches. In particular, we answer an open question by Askalidis et al. (2013) about the existence of a $\frac{3}{2}$-approximation algorithm for the MAX-SMTI problem with free edges. This demonstrates that this technique can grasp the underlying essence of these problems quite well and have the potential to be able to solve many future applications.
Contrastive loss has been increasingly used in learning representations from multiple modalities. In the limit, the nature of the contrastive loss encourages modalities to exactly match each other in the latent space. Yet it remains an open question how the modality alignment affects the downstream task performance. In this paper, based on an information-theoretic argument, we first prove that exact modality alignment is sub-optimal in general for downstream prediction tasks. Hence we advocate that the key of better performance lies in meaningful latent modality structures instead of perfect modality alignment. To this end, we propose three general approaches to construct latent modality structures. Specifically, we design 1) a deep feature separation loss for intra-modality regularization; 2) a Brownian-bridge loss for inter-modality regularization; and 3) a geometric consistency loss for both intra- and inter-modality regularization. Extensive experiments are conducted on two popular multi-modal representation learning frameworks: the CLIP-based two-tower model and the ALBEF-based fusion model. We test our model on a variety of tasks including zero/few-shot image classification, image-text retrieval, visual question answering, visual reasoning, and visual entailment. Our method achieves consistent improvements over existing methods, demonstrating the effectiveness and generalizability of our proposed approach on latent modality structure regularization.
Conventional methods for object detection typically require a substantial amount of training data and preparing such high-quality training data is very labor-intensive. In this paper, we propose a novel few-shot object detection network that aims at detecting objects of unseen categories with only a few annotated examples. Central to our method are our Attention-RPN, Multi-Relation Detector and Contrastive Training strategy, which exploit the similarity between the few shot support set and query set to detect novel objects while suppressing false detection in the background. To train our network, we contribute a new dataset that contains 1000 categories of various objects with high-quality annotations. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first datasets specifically designed for few-shot object detection. Once our few-shot network is trained, it can detect objects of unseen categories without further training or fine-tuning. Our method is general and has a wide range of potential applications. We produce a new state-of-the-art performance on different datasets in the few-shot setting. The dataset link is //github.com/fanq15/Few-Shot-Object-Detection-Dataset.
Due to the significance and value in human-computer interaction and natural language processing, task-oriented dialog systems are attracting more and more attention in both academic and industrial communities. In this paper, we survey recent advances and challenges in an issue-specific manner. We discuss three critical topics for task-oriented dialog systems: (1) improving data efficiency to facilitate dialog system modeling in low-resource settings, (2) modeling multi-turn dynamics for dialog policy learning to achieve better task-completion performance, and (3) integrating domain ontology knowledge into the dialog model in both pipeline and end-to-end models. We also review the recent progresses in dialog evaluation and some widely-used corpora. We believe that this survey can shed a light on future research in task-oriented dialog systems.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191