Jeremy Nixon

Jeremy Nixon

This paper presents a novel approach to machine learning algorithm design based on information theory, specifically mutual information (MI). We propose a framework for learning and representing functional relationships in data using MI-based features. Our method aims to capture the underlying structure of information in datasets, enabling more efficient and generalizable learning algorithms. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach through experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets, showing improved performance in tasks such as function classification, regression, and cross-dataset transfer. This work contributes to the growing field of metalearning and automated machine learning, offering a new perspective on how to leverage information theory for algorithm design and dataset analysis and proposing new mutual information theoretic foundations to learning algorithms.

Zachary Nado, Neil Band, Mark Collier et al.

High-quality estimates of uncertainty and robustness are crucial for numerous real-world applications, especially for deep learning which underlies many deployed ML systems. The ability to compare techniques for improving these estimates is therefore very important for research and practice alike. Yet, competitive comparisons of methods are often lacking due to a range of reasons, including: compute availability for extensive tuning, incorporation of sufficiently many baselines, and concrete documentation for reproducibility. In this paper we introduce Uncertainty Baselines: high-quality implementations of standard and state-of-the-art deep learning methods on a variety of tasks. As of this writing, the collection spans 19 methods across 9 tasks, each with at least 5 metrics. Each baseline is a self-contained experiment pipeline with easily reusable and extendable components. Our goal is to provide immediate starting points for experimentation with new methods or applications. Additionally we provide model checkpoints, experiment outputs as Python notebooks, and leaderboards for comparing results. Code available at https://github.com/google/uncertainty-baselines.

Jeremy Nixon, Mike Dusenberry, Ghassen Jerfel et al.

Overconfidence and underconfidence in machine learning classifiers is measured by calibration: the degree to which the probabilities predicted for each class match the accuracy of the classifier on that prediction. How one measures calibration remains a challenge: expected calibration error, the most popular metric, has numerous flaws which we outline, and there is no clear empirical understanding of how its choices affect conclusions in practice, and what recommendations there are to counteract its flaws. In this paper, we perform a comprehensive empirical study of choices in calibration measures including measuring all probabilities rather than just the maximum prediction, thresholding probability values, class conditionality, number of bins, bins that are adaptive to the datapoint density, and the norm used to compare accuracies to confidences. To analyze the sensitivity of calibration measures, we study the impact of optimizing directly for each variant with recalibration techniques. Across MNIST, Fashion MNIST, CIFAR-10/100, and ImageNet, we find that conclusions on the rank ordering of recalibration methods is drastically impacted by the choice of calibration measure. We find that conditioning on the class leads to more effective calibration evaluations, and that using the L2 norm rather than the L1 norm improves both optimization for calibration metrics and the rank correlation measuring metric consistency. Adaptive binning schemes lead to more stablity of metric rank ordering when the number of bins vary, and is also recommended. We open source a library for the use of our calibration measures.

Jeremy Nixon, Annika Singh

In order to automate AI research we introduce a full, end-to-end framework, OMEGA: Optimizing Machine learning by Evaluating Generated Algorithms, that starts at idea generation and ends with executable code. Our system combines structured meta-prompt engineering with executable code generation to create new ML classifiers. The OMEGA framework has been utilized to generate several novel algorithms that outperform scikit-learn baselines across a robust selection of 20 benchmark datasets (infinity-bench). You can access models discussed in this paper and more in the python package: pip install omega-models.

Jonathan Stray, Ivan Vendrov, Jeremy Nixon et al.

We describe cases where real recommender systems were modified in the service of various human values such as diversity, fairness, well-being, time well spent, and factual accuracy. From this we identify the current practice of values engineering: the creation of classifiers from human-created data with value-based labels. This has worked in practice for a variety of issues, but problems are addressed one at a time, and users and other stakeholders have seldom been involved. Instead, we look to AI alignment work for approaches that could learn complex values directly from stakeholders, and identify four major directions: useful measures of alignment, participatory design and operation, interactive value learning, and informed deliberative judgments.

Sergei Volodin, Nevan Wichers, Jeremy Nixon

Causal models bring many benefits to decision-making systems (or agents) by making them interpretable, sample-efficient, and robust to changes in the input distribution. However, spurious correlations can lead to wrong causal models and predictions. We consider the problem of inferring a causal model of a reinforcement learning environment and we propose a method to deal with spurious correlations. Specifically, our method designs a reward function that incentivizes an agent to do an intervention to find errors in the causal model. The data obtained from doing the intervention is used to improve the causal model. We propose several intervention design methods and compare them. The experimental results in a grid-world environment show that our approach leads to better causal models compared to baselines: learning the model on data from a random policy or a policy trained on the environment's reward. The main contribution consists of methods to design interventions to resolve spurious correlations.

Jeremy Nixon, Jeremiah Liu, David Berthelot

One promising approach to dealing with datapoints that are outside of the initial training distribution (OOD) is to create new classes that capture similarities in the datapoints previously rejected as uncategorizable. Systems that generate labels can be deployed against an arbitrary amount of data, discovering classification schemes that through training create a higher quality representation of data. We introduce the Dataset Reconstruction Accuracy, a new and important measure of the effectiveness of a model's ability to create labels. We introduce benchmarks against this Dataset Reconstruction metric. We apply a new heuristic, class learnability, for deciding whether a class is worthy of addition to the training dataset. We show that our class discovery system can be successfully applied to vision and language, and we demonstrate the value of semi-supervised learning in automatically discovering novel classes.

Michael W. Dusenberry, Dustin Tran, Edward Choi et al.

In medicine, both ethical and monetary costs of incorrect predictions can be significant, and the complexity of the problems often necessitates increasingly complex models. Recent work has shown that changing just the random seed is enough for otherwise well-tuned deep neural networks to vary in their individual predicted probabilities. In light of this, we investigate the role of model uncertainty methods in the medical domain. Using RNN ensembles and various Bayesian RNNs, we show that population-level metrics, such as AUC-PR, AUC-ROC, log-likelihood, and calibration error, do not capture model uncertainty. Meanwhile, the presence of significant variability in patient-specific predictions and optimal decisions motivates the need for capturing model uncertainty. Understanding the uncertainty for individual patients is an area with clear clinical impact, such as determining when a model decision is likely to be brittle. We further show that RNNs with only Bayesian embeddings can be a more efficient way to capture model uncertainty compared to ensembles, and we analyze how model uncertainty is impacted across individual input features and patient subgroups.

Luke Metz, Niru Maheswaranathan, Jeremy Nixon et al.

Deep learning has shown that learned functions can dramatically outperform hand-designed functions on perceptual tasks. Analogously, this suggests that learned optimizers may similarly outperform current hand-designed optimizers, especially for specific problems. However, learned optimizers are notoriously difficult to train and have yet to demonstrate wall-clock speedups over hand-designed optimizers, and thus are rarely used in practice. Typically, learned optimizers are trained by truncated backpropagation through an unrolled optimization process resulting in gradients that are either strongly biased (for short truncations) or have exploding norm (for long truncations). In this work we propose a training scheme which overcomes both of these difficulties, by dynamically weighting two unbiased gradient estimators for a variational loss on optimizer performance, allowing us to train neural networks to perform optimization of a specific task faster than tuned first-order methods. We demonstrate these results on problems where our learned optimizer trains convolutional networks faster in wall-clock time compared to tuned first-order methods and with an improvement in test loss.