Ezra Edelman

Ezra Edelman, Surbhi Goel

We study online learning in the adversarial injection model introduced by [Goel et al. 2017], where a stream of labeled examples is predominantly drawn i.i.d.\ from an unknown distribution $\mathcal{D}$, but may be interspersed with adversarially chosen instances without the learner knowing which rounds are adversarial. Crucially, labels are always consistent with a fixed target concept (the clean-label setting). The learner is additionally allowed to abstain from predicting, and the total error counts the mistakes whenever the learner decides to predict and incorrect abstentions when it abstains on i.i.d.\ rounds. Perhaps surprisingly, prior work shows that oracle access to the underlying distribution yields $O(d^2 \log T)$ combined error for VC dimension $d$, while distribution-agnostic algorithms achieve only $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ for restricted classes, leaving open whether this gap is fundamental. We resolve this question by proving a matching $Ω(\sqrt{T})$ lower bound for VC dimension $1$, establishing a sharp separation between the two information regimes. On the algorithmic side, we introduce a potential-based framework driven by \emph{robust witnesses}, small subsets of labeled examples that certify predictions while remaining resilient to adversarial contamination. We instantiate this framework using two combinatorial dimensions: (1) \emph{inference dimension}, yielding combined error $\tilde{O}(T^{1-1/k})$ for classes of inference dimension $k$, and (2) \emph{certificate dimension}, a new relaxation we introduce. As an application, we show that halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^2$ have certificate dimension $3$, obtaining the first distribution-agnostic bound of $\tilde{O}(T^{2/3})$ for this class. This is notable since [Blum et al. 2021] showed halfspaces are not robustly learnable under clean-label attacks without abstention.

Jingwen Liu, Ezra Edelman, Surbhi Goel et al.

This work investigates the ``small-vs-large gap'', where repeating on fewer samples can lead to compute saving during training compared to using a larger dataset. This is observed across algorithmic tasks, architectures and optimizers and cannot be explained using prior theory. We argue that the speedup comes from appropriate layer-wise growth enabled by sampling biases, which is more pronounced when the dataset size is smaller. We provide both theoretical analysis and empirical evidence from various interventions. Our results suggest that using a smaller dataset with more repetitions is not just a fallback strategy under data scarcity, but can be proactively leveraged as a favorable inductive biases for optimization, particularly in reasoning tasks.

Benjamin L. Edelman, Ezra Edelman, Surbhi Goel et al.

Large language models have the ability to generate text that mimics patterns in their inputs. We introduce a simple Markov Chain sequence modeling task in order to study how this in-context learning (ICL) capability emerges. In our setting, each example is sampled from a Markov chain drawn from a prior distribution over Markov chains. Transformers trained on this task form \emph{statistical induction heads} which compute accurate next-token probabilities given the bigram statistics of the context. During the course of training, models pass through multiple phases: after an initial stage in which predictions are uniform, they learn to sub-optimally predict using in-context single-token statistics (unigrams); then, there is a rapid phase transition to the correct in-context bigram solution. We conduct an empirical and theoretical investigation of this multi-phase process, showing how successful learning results from the interaction between the transformer's layers, and uncovering evidence that the presence of the simpler unigram solution may delay formation of the final bigram solution. We examine how learning is affected by varying the prior distribution over Markov chains, and consider the generalization of our in-context learning of Markov chains (ICL-MC) task to $n$-grams for $n > 2$.

Parsa Mirtaheri, Ezra Edelman, Samy Jelassi et al.

Inference-time computation has emerged as a promising scaling axis for improving large language model reasoning. However, despite yielding impressive performance, the optimal allocation of inference-time computation remains poorly understood. A central question is whether to prioritize sequential scaling (e.g., longer chains of thought) or parallel scaling (e.g., majority voting across multiple short chains of thought). In this work, we seek to illuminate the landscape of test-time scaling by demonstrating the existence of reasoning settings where sequential scaling offers an exponential advantage over parallel scaling. These settings are based on graph connectivity problems in challenging distributions of graphs. We validate our theoretical findings with comprehensive experiments across a range of language models, including models trained from scratch for graph connectivity with different chain of thought strategies as well as large reasoning models.