The goal of domain generalization algorithms is to predict well on distributions different from those seen during training While a myriad of domain generalization algorithms exist, inconsistencies in experimental conditions -- datasets, architectures, and model selection criteria -- render fair and realistic comparisons difficult In this paper, we are interested in understanding how useful domain generalization algorithms are in realistic settings As a first step, we realize that model selection is non-trivial for domain generalization tasks Contrary to prior work, we argue that domain generalization algorithms without a model selection strategy should be regarded as incomplete Next, we implement DomainBed, a testbed for domain generalization including seven multi-domain datasets, nine baseline algorithms, and three model selection criteria We conduct extensive experiments using DomainBed and find that, when carefully implemented, empirical risk minimization shows state-of-the-art performance across all datasets Looking forward, we hope that the release of DomainBed, along with contributions from fellow researchers, will streamline reproducible and rigorous research in domain generalization

In Search of Lost Domain Generalization

Deep learning approaches to anomaly detection have recently improved the state of the art in detection performance on complex datasets such as large collections of images or text. These results have sparked a renewed interest in the anomaly detection problem and led to the introduction of a great variety of new methods. With the emergence of numerous such methods, including approaches based on generative models, one-class classification, and reconstruction, there is a growing need to bring methods of this field into a systematic and unified perspective. In this review we aim to identify the common underlying principles as well as the assumptions that are often made implicitly by various methods. In particular, we draw connections between classic 'shallow' and novel deep approaches and show how this relation might cross-fertilize or extend both directions. We further provide an empirical assessment of major existing methods that is enriched by the use of recent explainability techniques, and present specific worked-through examples together with practical advice. Finally, we outline critical open challenges and identify specific paths for future research in anomaly detection.

A Unifying Review of Deep and Shallow Anomaly Detection

Deep learning approaches to anomaly detection (AD) have recently improved the state of the art in detection performance on complex data sets, such as large collections of images or text. These results have sparked a renewed interest in the AD problem and led to the introduction of a great variety of new methods. With the emergence of numerous such methods, including approaches based on generative models, one-class classification, and reconstruction, there is a growing need to bring methods of this field into a systematic and unified perspective. In this review, we aim to identify the common underlying principles and the assumptions that are often made implicitly by various methods. In particular, we draw connections between classic “shallow” and novel deep approaches and show how this relation might cross-fertilize or extend both directions. We further provide an empirical assessment of major existing methods that are enriched by the use of recent explainability techniques and present specific worked-through examples together with practical advice. Finally, we outline critical open challenges and identify specific paths for future research in AD.

/pdf/a-unifying-review-of-deep-and-shallow-anomaly-detection-61ph1bv9hs.pdf

Deep neural networks excel at learning from labeled data and achieve state-of-the-art results on a wide array of Natural Language Processing tasks. In contrast, learning from unlabeled data, especially under domain shift, remains a challenge. Motivated by the latest advances, in this survey we review neural unsupervised domain adaptation techniques which do not require labeled target domain data. This is a more challenging yet a more widely applicable setup. We outline methods, from early traditional non-neural methods to pre-trained model transfer. We also revisit the notion of domain, and we uncover a bias in the type of Natural Language Processing tasks which received most attention. Lastly, we outline future directions, particularly the broader need for out-of-distribution generalization of future NLP.

/pdf/neural-unsupervised-domain-adaptation-in-nlp-a-survey-1jktaq9cjn.pdf

Neural Unsupervised Domain Adaptation in NLP—A Survey

Invariant Causal Prediction (Peters et al., 2016) is a technique for out-of-distribution generalization which assumes that some aspects of the data distribution vary across the training set but that the underlying causal mechanisms remain constant. Recently, Arjovsky et al. (2019) proposed Invariant Risk Minimization (IRM), an objective based on this idea for learning deep, invariant features of data which are a complex function of latent variables; many alternatives have subsequently been suggested. However, formal guarantees for all of these works are severely lacking. In this paper, we present the first analysis of classification under the IRM objective--as well as these recently proposed alternatives--under a fairly natural and general model. In the linear case, we show simple conditions under which the optimal solution succeeds or, more often, fails to recover the optimal invariant predictor. We furthermore present the very first results in the non-linear regime: we demonstrate that IRM can fail catastrophically unless the test data are sufficiently similar to the training distribution--this is precisely the issue that it was intended to solve. Thus, in this setting we find that IRM and its alternatives fundamentally do not improve over standard Empirical Risk Minimization.

The Risks of Invariant Risk Minimization

Distributional shift is one of the major obstacles when transferring machine learning prediction systems from the lab to the real world. To tackle this problem, we assume that variation across training domains is representative of the variation we might encounter at test time, but also that shifts at test time may be more extreme in magnitude. In particular, we show that reducing differences in risk across training domains can reduce a model's sensitivity to a wide range of extreme distributional shifts, including the challenging setting where the input contains both causal and anti-causal elements. We motivate this approach, Risk Extrapolation (REx), as a form of robust optimization over a perturbation set of extrapolated domains (MM-REx), and propose a penalty on the variance of training risks (V-REx) as a simpler variant. We prove that variants of REx can recover the causal mechanisms of the targets, while also providing some robustness to changes in the input distribution ("covariate shift"). By appropriately trading-off robustness to causally induced distributional shifts and covariate shift, REx is able to outperform alternative methods such as Invariant Risk Minimization in situations where these types of shift co-occur.

Out-of-Distribution Generalization via Risk Extrapolation (REx)

One of the principal scientific challenges in deep learning is explaining generalization, i.e., why the particular way the community now trains networks to achieve small training error also leads to small error on held-out data from the same population. It is widely appreciated that some worst-case theories -- such as those based on the VC dimension of the class of predictors induced by modern neural network architectures -- are unable to explain empirical performance. A large volume of work aims to close this gap, primarily by developing bounds on generalization error, optimization error, and excess risk. When evaluated empirically, however, most of these bounds are numerically vacuous. Focusing on generalization bounds, this work addresses the question of how to evaluate such bounds empirically. Jiang et al. (2020) recently described a large-scale empirical study aimed at uncovering potential causal relationships between bounds/measures and generalization. Building on their study, we highlight where their proposed methods can obscure failures and successes of generalization measures in explaining generalization. We argue that generalization measures should instead be evaluated within the framework of distributional robustness.

In Search of Robust Measures of Generalization.

/pdf/in-search-of-robust-measures-of-generalization-3qrtktvdnx.pdf

In search of robust measures of generalization

We present a smoothly broken power law functional form (that we refer to as a Broken Neural Scaling Law (BNSL)) that accurately models&extrapolates the scaling behaviors of deep neural networks (i.e. how the evaluation metric of interest varies as amount of compute used for training (or inference), number of model parameters, training dataset size, model input size, number of training steps, or upstream performance varies) for various architectures&for each of various tasks within a large&diverse set of upstream&downstream tasks, in zero-shot, prompted,&finetuned settings. This set includes large-scale vision, language, audio, video, diffusion, generative modeling, multimodal learning, contrastive learning, AI alignment, AI capabilities, robotics, out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization, continual learning, transfer learning, uncertainty estimation / calibration, OOD detection, adversarial robustness, distillation, sparsity, retrieval, quantization, pruning, fairness, molecules, computer programming/coding, math word problems,"emergent phase transitions", arithmetic, supervised learning, unsupervised/self-supervised learning,&reinforcement learning (single agent&multi-agent). When compared to other functional forms for neural scaling, this functional form yields extrapolations of scaling behavior that are considerably more accurate on this set. Moreover, this functional form accurately models&extrapolates scaling behavior that other functional forms are incapable of expressing such as the nonmonotonic transitions present in the scaling behavior of phenomena such as double descent&the delayed, sharp inflection points present in the scaling behavior of tasks such as arithmetic. Lastly, we use this functional form to glean insights about the limit of the predictability of scaling behavior. Code is available at https://github.com/ethancaballero/broken_neural_scaling_laws

Broken Neural Scaling Laws

Distributional shift is one of the major obstacles when transferring machine learning prediction systems from the lab to the real world. To tackle this problem, we assume that variation across training domains is representative of the variation we might encounter at test time, but also that shifts at test time may be more extreme in magnitude. In particular, we show that reducing differences in risk across training domains can reduce a model’s sensitivity to a wide range of extreme distributional shifts, including the challenging setting where the input contains both causal and anti-causal elements. We motivate this approach, Risk Extrapolation (REx), as a form of robust optimization over a perturbation set of extrapolated domains (MM-REx), and propose a penalty on the variance of training risks (V-REx) as a simpler variant. We prove that variants of REx can recover the causal mechanisms of the targets, while also providing some robustness to changes in the input distribution (``covariate shift''). By appropriately trading-off robustness to causally induced distributional shifts and covariate shift, REx is able to outperform alternative methods such as Invariant Risk Minimization in situations where these types of shift co-occur.

/pdf/out-of-distribution-generalization-via-risk-extrapolation-dqx38nsaiz.pdf

Ethan Caballero

Papers

Out-of-Distribution Generalization via Risk Extrapolation (REx)

In Search of Robust Measures of Generalization.

In search of robust measures of generalization

Broken Neural Scaling Laws

Out-of-Distribution Generalization via Risk Extrapolation (REx)