NeurIPS 2022 论文列表

We study the problem of online learning in competitive settings in the context of two-sided matching markets. In particular, one side of the market, the agents, must learn about their preferences over the other side, the firms, through repeated interaction while competing with other agents for successful matches. We propose a class of decentralized, communication- and coordination-free algorithms that agents can use to reach to their stable match in structured matching markets. In contrast to prior works, the proposed algorithms make decisions based solely on an agent's own history of play and requires no foreknowledge of the firms' preferences. Our algorithms are constructed by splitting up the statistical problem of learning one's preferences, from noisy observations, from the problem of competing for firms. We show that under realistic structural assumptions on the underlying preferences of the agents and firms, the proposed algorithms incur a regret which grows at most logarithmically in the time horizon. However, we note that in the worst case, it may grow exponentially in the size of the market.

Non-stationary online learning has drawn much attention in recent years. In particular, \emph{dynamic regret} and \emph{adaptive regret} are proposed as two principled performance measures for online convex optimization in non-stationary environments. To optimize them, a two-layer online ensemble is usually deployed due to the inherent uncertainty of the non-stationarity, in which a group of base-learners are maintained and a meta-algorithm is employed to track the best one on the fly. However, the two-layer structure raises the concern about the computational complexity--those methods typically maintain $O(\log T)$ base-learners simultaneously for a $T$-round online game and thus perform multiple projections onto the feasible domain per round, which becomes the computational bottleneck when the domain is complicated. In this paper, we present efficient methods for optimizing dynamic regret and adaptive regret, which reduce the number of projections per round from $O(\log T)$ to $1$. Moreover, our obtained algorithms require only one gradient query and one function evaluation at each round. Our technique hinges on the reduction mechanism developed in parameter-free online learning and requires non-trivial twists on non-stationary online methods. Empirical studies verify our theoretical findings.

A multitude of explainability methods has been described to try to help users better understand how modern AI systems make decisions. However, most performance metrics developed to evaluate these methods have remained largely theoretical -- without much consideration for the human end-user. In particular, it is not yet clear (1) how useful current explainability methods are in real-world scenarios; and (2) whether current performance metrics accurately reflect the usefulness of explanation methods for the end user. To fill this gap, we conducted psychophysics experiments at scale ($n=1,150$) to evaluate the usefulness of representative attribution methods in three real-world scenarios. Our results demonstrate that the degree to which individual attribution methods help human participants better understand an AI system varies widely across these scenarios. This suggests the need to move beyond quantitative improvements of current attribution methods, towards the development of complementary approaches that provide qualitatively different sources of information to human end-users.

Referred to as the third rung of the causal inference ladder, counterfactual queries typically ask the "What if ?" question retrospectively. The standard approach to estimate counterfactuals resides in using a structural equation model that accurately reflects the underlying data generating process. However, such models are seldom available in practice and one usually wishes to infer them from observational data alone. Unfortunately, the correct structural equation model is in general not identifiable from the observed factual distribution. Nevertheless, in this work, we show that under the assumption that the main latent contributors to the treatment responses are categorical, the counterfactuals can be still reliably predicted. Building upon this assumption, we introduce CounterFactual Query Prediction (\method), a novel method to infer counterfactuals from continuous observations when the background variables are categorical. We show that our method significantly outperforms previously available deep-learning-based counterfactual methods, both theoretically and empirically on time series and image data. Our code is available at https://github.com/edebrouwer/cfqp.

Since out-of-distribution generalization is a generally ill-posed problem, various proxy targets (e.g., calibration, adversarial robustness, algorithmic corruptions, invariance across shifts) were studied across different research programs resulting in different recommendations. While sharing the same aspirational goal, these approaches have never been tested under the same experimental conditions on real data. In this paper, we take a unified view of previous work, highlighting message discrepancies that we address empirically, and providing recommendations on how to measure the robustness of a model and how to improve it. To this end, we collect 172 publicly available dataset pairs for training and out-of-distribution evaluation of accuracy, calibration error, adversarial attacks, environment invariance, and synthetic corruptions. We fine-tune over 31k networks, from nine different architectures in the many- and few-shot setting. Our findings confirm that in- and out-of-distribution accuracies tend to increase jointly, but show that their relation is largely dataset-dependent, and in general more nuanced and more complex than posited by previous, smaller scale studies.

We describe a customizable benchmark for hierarchical and ontological multi-label classification, a task where labels are equipped with a graph structure and data items can be assigned multiple labels. We find that current benchmarks do not adequately represent the problem space, casting doubt on the generalizability of current results. We consider three dimensions of the problem space: context (availability of rich features on the data and labels), distribution of labels over data, and graph structure. For context, the lack of complex features on the labels (and in some cases, the data) artificially prevent the use of modern representation learning techniques as an appropriate baseline. For distribution, we find the long tail of labels over data constitute a few-shot learning problem that artificially confounds the results: for most common benchmarks, over 40% of the labels have fewer than 5 data points in the training set. For structure, we find that the correlation between performance and the height of the tree can explain some of the variation in performance, informing practical utility. In this paper, we demonstrate how the lack of diversity in benchmarks can confound performance analysis, then present a declarative query system called Ontologue for generating custom benchmarks with specific properties, then use this system to design 4 new benchmarks extracted from DBPedia that better represent the problem space. We evaluate state-of-the-art algorithms on both existing and new benchmarks and show that the performance conclusions can vary significantly depending on the dimensions we consider. We intend the system and derived benchmarks to improve the analysis of generalizability for these problems.