LGNov 20, 2024
Replicable Online LearningSaba Ahmadi, Siddharth Bhandari, Avrim Blum
We investigate the concept of algorithmic replicability introduced by Impagliazzo et al. 2022, Ghazi et al. 2021, Ahn et al. 2024 in an online setting. In our model, the input sequence received by the online learner is generated from time-varying distributions chosen by an adversary (obliviously). Our objective is to design low-regret online algorithms that, with high probability, produce the exact same sequence of actions when run on two independently sampled input sequences generated as described above. We refer to such algorithms as adversarially replicable. Previous works (such as Esfandiari et al. 2022) explored replicability in the online setting under inputs generated independently from a fixed distribution; we term this notion as iid-replicability. Our model generalizes to capture both adversarial and iid input sequences, as well as their mixtures, which can be modeled by setting certain distributions as point-masses. We demonstrate adversarially replicable online learning algorithms for online linear optimization and the experts problem that achieve sub-linear regret. Additionally, we propose a general framework for converting an online learner into an adversarially replicable one within our setting, bounding the new regret in terms of the original algorithm's regret. We also present a nearly optimal (in terms of regret) iid-replicable online algorithm for the experts problem, highlighting the distinction between the iid and adversarial notions of replicability. Finally, we establish lower bounds on the regret (in terms of the replicability parameter and time) that any replicable online algorithm must incur.
LGOct 27, 2025
Debiasing Reward Models by Representation Learning with GuaranteesIgnavier Ng, Patrick Blöbaum, Siddharth Bhandari et al.
Recent alignment techniques, such as reinforcement learning from human feedback, have been widely adopted to align large language models with human preferences by learning and leveraging reward models. In practice, these models often exploit spurious correlations, involving, e.g., response length, discrimination, sycophancy, and conceptual bias, which is a problem that has received increasing attention. In this work, we propose a principled framework that mitigates these biases in reward models while preserving the underlying factors that reflect intended preferences. We first provide a formulation of the data-generating process, assuming that the observed data (e.g., text) is generated from both spurious and non-spurious latent variables. We show that, interestingly, these non-spurious latent variables can be theoretically identified from data, regardless of whether a surrogate for the spurious latent variables is available. This further inspires a practical method that uses variational inference to recover these variables and leverages them to train reward models. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that our method effectively mitigates spurious correlation issues and yields more robust reward models.
LGOct 17, 2025
Learning to Answer from Correct DemonstrationsNirmit Joshi, Gene Li, Siddharth Bhandari et al.
We study the problem of learning to generate an answer (or completion) to a question (or prompt), where there could be multiple correct answers, any one of which is acceptable at test time. Learning is based on demonstrations of some correct answer to each training question, as in Supervised Fine Tuning (SFT). We formalize the problem as offline imitation learning in contextual bandits, with demonstrations from some optimal policy, without explicitly observed rewards. Prior work assumes that the demonstrator belongs to a low-complexity policy class, which motivates maximum likelihood estimation (i.e., log-loss minimization). In contrast, we propose relying only on the reward model (specifying which answers are correct) being in a low-cardinality class, which we argue is a weaker assumption. We show that likelihood maximization methods can fail in this case, and instead devise an alternative novel approach that learns with sample complexity logarithmic in the cardinality of the reward class. Our work motivates looking beyond likelihood maximization when learning from correct demonstrations.
LGFeb 22, 2025
Verifying Classification with Limited DisclosureSiddharth Bhandari, Liren Shan
We consider the multi-party classification problem introduced by Dong, Hartline, and Vijayaraghavan (2022) motivated by electronic discovery. In this problem, our goal is to design a protocol that guarantees the requesting party receives nearly all responsive documents while minimizing the disclosure of nonresponsive documents. We develop verification protocols that certify the correctness of a classifier by disclosing a few nonresponsive documents. We introduce a combinatorial notion called the Leave-One-Out dimension of a family of classifiers and show that the number of nonresponsive documents disclosed by our protocol is at most this dimension in the realizable setting, where a perfect classifier exists in this family. For linear classifiers with a margin, we characterize the trade-off between the margin and the number of nonresponsive documents that must be disclosed for verification. Specifically, we establish a trichotomy in this requirement: for $d$ dimensional instances, when the margin exceeds $1/3$, verification can be achieved by revealing only $O(1)$ nonresponsive documents; when the margin is exactly $1/3$, in the worst case, at least $Ω(d)$ nonresponsive documents must be disclosed; when the margin is smaller than $1/3$, verification requires $Ω(e^d)$ nonresponsive documents. We believe this result is of independent interest with applications to coding theory and combinatorial geometry. We further extend our protocols to the nonrealizable setting defining an analogous combinatorial quantity robust Leave-One-Out dimension, and to scenarios where the protocol is tolerant to misclassification errors by Alice.
LGJun 5, 2024
Distributional Adversarial LossSaba Ahmadi, Siddharth Bhandari, Avrim Blum et al.
We initiate the study of a new notion of adversarial loss which we call distributional adversarial loss. In this notion, we assume for each original example, the allowed adversarial perturbation set is a family of distributions, and the adversarial loss over each example is the maximum loss over all the associated distributions. The goal is to minimize the overall adversarial loss. We show sample complexity bounds in the PAC-learning setting for our notion of adversarial loss. Our notion of adversarial loss contrasts the prior work on robust learning that considers a set of points, not distributions, as the perturbation set of each clean example. As an application of our approach, we show how to unify the two lines of work on randomized smoothing and robust learning in the PAC-learning setting and derive sample complexity bounds for randomized smoothing methods. Furthermore, we investigate the role of randomness in achieving robustness against adversarial attacks. We show a general derandomization technique that preserves the extent of a randomized classifier's robustness against adversarial attacks and show its effectiveness empirically.
LGMar 15, 2024
Limits of Approximating the Median Treatment EffectRaghavendra Addanki, Siddharth Bhandari
Average Treatment Effect (ATE) estimation is a well-studied problem in causal inference. However, it does not necessarily capture the heterogeneity in the data, and several approaches have been proposed to tackle the issue, including estimating the Quantile Treatment Effects. In the finite population setting containing $n$ individuals, with treatment and control values denoted by the potential outcome vectors $\mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}$, much of the prior work focused on estimating median$(\mathbf{a}) -$ median$(\mathbf{b})$, where median($\mathbf x$) denotes the median value in the sorted ordering of all the values in vector $\mathbf x$. It is known that estimating the difference of medians is easier than the desired estimand of median$(\mathbf{a-b})$, called the Median Treatment Effect (MTE). The fundamental problem of causal inference -- for every individual $i$, we can only observe one of the potential outcome values, i.e., either the value $a_i$ or $b_i$, but not both, makes estimating MTE particularly challenging. In this work, we argue that MTE is not estimable and detail a novel notion of approximation that relies on the sorted order of the values in $\mathbf{a-b}$. Next, we identify a quantity called variability that exactly captures the complexity of MTE estimation. By drawing connections to instance-optimality studied in theoretical computer science, we show that every algorithm for estimating the MTE obtains an approximation error that is no better than the error of an algorithm that computes variability. Finally, we provide a simple linear time algorithm for computing the variability exactly. Unlike much prior work, a particular highlight of our work is that we make no assumptions about how the potential outcome vectors are generated or how they are correlated, except that the potential outcome values are $k$-ary, i.e., take one of $k$ discrete values.