Umberto M. Tomasini

Francesco Cagnetta, Leonardo Petrini, Umberto M. Tomasini et al. · cambridge

Deep learning algorithms demonstrate a surprising ability to learn high-dimensional tasks from limited examples. This is commonly attributed to the depth of neural networks, enabling them to build a hierarchy of abstract, low-dimensional data representations. However, how many training examples are required to learn such representations remains unknown. To quantitatively study this question, we introduce the Random Hierarchy Model: a family of synthetic tasks inspired by the hierarchical structure of language and images. The model is a classification task where each class corresponds to a group of high-level features, chosen among several equivalent groups associated with the same class. In turn, each feature corresponds to a group of sub-features chosen among several equivalent ones and so on, following a hierarchy of composition rules. We find that deep networks learn the task by developing internal representations invariant to exchanging equivalent groups. Moreover, the number of data required corresponds to the point where correlations between low-level features and classes become detectable. Overall, our results indicate how deep networks overcome the curse of dimensionality by building invariant representations, and provide an estimate of the number of data required to learn a hierarchical task.

Umberto M. Tomasini, Leonardo Petrini, Francesco Cagnetta et al.

A central question of machine learning is how deep nets manage to learn tasks in high dimensions. An appealing hypothesis is that they achieve this feat by building a representation of the data where information irrelevant to the task is lost. For image datasets, this view is supported by the observation that after (and not before) training, the neural representation becomes less and less sensitive to diffeomorphisms acting on images as the signal propagates through the net. This loss of sensitivity correlates with performance, and surprisingly correlates with a gain of sensitivity to white noise acquired during training. These facts are unexplained, and as we demonstrate still hold when white noise is added to the images of the training set. Here, we (i) show empirically for various architectures that stability to image diffeomorphisms is achieved by both spatial and channel pooling, (ii) introduce a model scale-detection task which reproduces our empirical observations on spatial pooling and (iii) compute analitically how the sensitivity to diffeomorphisms and noise scales with depth due to spatial pooling. The scalings are found to depend on the presence of strides in the net architecture. We find that the increased sensitivity to noise is due to the perturbing noise piling up during pooling, after being rectified by ReLU units.

Umberto M. Tomasini, Antonio Sclocchi, Matthieu Wyart

Recently, several theories including the replica method made predictions for the generalization error of Kernel Ridge Regression. In some regimes, they predict that the method has a `spectral bias': decomposing the true function $f^*$ on the eigenbasis of the kernel, it fits well the coefficients associated with the O(P) largest eigenvalues, where $P$ is the size of the training set. This prediction works very well on benchmark data sets such as images, yet the assumptions these approaches make on the data are never satisfied in practice. To clarify when the spectral bias prediction holds, we first focus on a one-dimensional model where rigorous results are obtained and then use scaling arguments to generalize and test our findings in higher dimensions. Our predictions include the classification case $f(x)=$sign$(x_1)$ with a data distribution that vanishes at the decision boundary $p(x)\sim x_1^χ$. For $χ>0$ and a Laplace kernel, we find that (i) there exists a cross-over ridge $λ^*_{d,χ}(P)\sim P^{-\frac{1}{d+χ}}$ such that for $λ\gg λ^*_{d,χ}(P)$, the replica method applies, but not for $λ\llλ^*_{d,χ}(P)$, (ii) in the ridge-less case, spectral bias predicts the correct training curve exponent only in the limit $d\rightarrow\infty$.