Karim Abou-Moustafa

Karim Abou-Moustafa

We consider the problem of estimating a regularization parameter, or a shrinkage coefficient $α\in (0,1)$ for Regularized Tyler's M-estimator (RTME). In particular, we propose to estimate an optimal shrinkage coefficient by setting $α$ as the solution to a suitably chosen objective function; namely the leave-one-out cross-validated (LOOCV) log-likelihood loss. Since LOOCV is computationally prohibitive even for moderate sample size $n$, we propose a computationally efficient approximation for the LOOCV log-likelihood loss that eliminates the need for invoking the RTME procedure $n$ times for each sample left out during the LOOCV procedure. This approximation yields an $O(n)$ reduction in the running time complexity for the LOOCV procedure, which results in a significant speedup for computing the LOOCV estimate. We demonstrate the efficiency and accuracy of the proposed approach on synthetic high-dimensional data sampled from heavy-tailed elliptical distributions, as well as on real high-dimensional datasets for object recognition, face recognition, and handwritten digit's recognition. Our experiments show that the proposed approach is efficient and consistently more accurate than other methods in the literature for shrinkage coefficient estimation.

Karim Abou-Moustafa, Csaba Szepesvari

There is accumulating evidence in the literature that stability of learning algorithms is a key characteristic that permits a learning algorithm to generalize. Despite various insightful results in this direction, there seems to be an overlooked dichotomy in the type of stability-based generalization bounds we have in the literature. On one hand, the literature seems to suggest that exponential generalization bounds for the estimated risk, which are optimal, can be only obtained through stringent, distribution independent and computationally intractable notions of stability such as uniform stability. On the other hand, it seems that weaker notions of stability such as hypothesis stability, although it is distribution dependent and more amenable to computation, can only yield polynomial generalization bounds for the estimated risk, which are suboptimal. In this paper, we address the gap between these two regimes of results. In particular, the main question we address here is \emph{whether it is possible to derive exponential generalization bounds for the estimated risk using a notion of stability that is computationally tractable and distribution dependent, but weaker than uniform stability. Using recent advances in concentration inequalities, and using a notion of stability that is weaker than uniform stability but distribution dependent and amenable to computation, we derive an exponential tail bound for the concentration of the estimated risk of a hypothesis returned by a general learning rule, where the estimated risk is expressed in terms of either the resubstitution estimate (empirical error), or the deleted (or, leave-one-out) estimate. As an illustration, we derive exponential tail bounds for ridge regression with unbounded responses, where we show how stability changes with the tail behavior of the response variables.

Karim Abou-Moustafa, Csaba Szepesvari

We consider a priori generalization bounds developed in terms of cross-validation estimates and the stability of learners. In particular, we first derive an exponential Efron-Stein type tail inequality for the concentration of a general function of n independent random variables. Next, under some reasonable notion of stability, we use this exponential tail bound to analyze the concentration of the k-fold cross-validation (KFCV) estimate around the true risk of a hypothesis generated by a general learning rule. While the accumulated literature has often attributed this concentration to the bias and variance of the estimator, our bound attributes this concentration to the stability of the learning rule and the number of folds k. This insight raises valid concerns related to the practical use of KFCV and suggests research directions to obtain reliable empirical estimates of the actual risk.