This work identifies and characterize an interesting dichotomy in the rates achievable in the supervised setting: there is a weak transfer regime where optimal rates are determined by information in either the source or target dataset but not both, and a strong transfer regime where much faster target rates are achievable, accounting for complementary information in source and target data.
Abstract
Transfer learning, in regression or classification, concerns problems where one aims to use imperfect data from a source distribution $P$ to improve prediction w.r.t. a target distribution $Q$. While there is now much theoretical understanding of the unsupervised setting of this problem (where no labeled target data is available), the supervised setting with labeled target data remains under-studied. We identify and characterize an interesting dichotomy in the rates achievable in the supervised setting: there is a weak transfer regime where optimal rates are determined by information in either the source or target dataset but not both, and a strong transfer regime where much faster target rates are achievable, accounting for complementary information in source and target data. Furthermore, while previous theoretical tools for the unsupervised setting can be extended to capture the weak transfer regime, we argue that they cannot capture the strong regime due to limitations inherent in the various notions of relatedness they rely on. Instead, we provide an appropriate refinement of relatedness notions---termed weak and strong moduli of transfer---that reveal the two regimes and lead to a nontrivial characterization of which pairs of distributions $P$ and $Q$ adhere to which regime. Finally, the above dichotomy reveals a new categorization of existing algorithmic approaches in terms of their optimality or lack-thereof across supervised regimes, and we provide a generic approach that remains nearly optimal in all regimes without prior distributional knowledge.
Transfer learning improves estimation in a target study using information from related sources. Classical transfer learning is typically data-based, requiring access to the source data or to a model fitted on them. Neither is available in many modern studies, as both are often proprietary or unreported. What can be tra...
This paper considers a particular type of distribution shift, label shift, and develops an e-icient inference procedure for general parameters characterizing the unlabeled target population, and proposes a progressive estimation strategy that unfolds in three stages: an initial heuristic guess, a consistent estimation,...
Training state-of-the-art models increasingly requires learning from large, heterogeneous datasets whose examples vary in quality, domain relevance, and source of supervision. Dataweighting---assigning different weights to training examples---offers a general way to control how such data influences training, but learni...
Data augmentation (DA) has become a fundamental component of modern machine learning systems and is widely regarded as an effective strategy for improving robustness and generalization. Despite its empirical success, the theoretical impact of DA under label noise remains poorly understood. In this work, we first theore...
Tabular foundation models (TFMs) achieve strong predictive performance by conditioning on labeled demonstrations provided in context, without any parameter update. Yet how individual demonstrations shape a given prediction remains poorly understood. This gap matters in practice: the context is often assembled from what...
Yacine Benihaddadene, Milan Bhan, Eliot Dugelay et al.· 0 citations
Set-valued classification (SVC) offers a practical approach to communicating uncertainty while maintaining accuracy by predicting variable-sized sets per input rather than fixed-sized sets (e.g. top-1 or top-5). However, set-valued classifiers (SVCs) exhibit significantly degraded performance on long-tailed and imbalan...
Kevin Kasa, Scott C. Lowe, Graham W. Taylor· 0 citations