Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Peter Grünwald

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

12 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

12

NeurIPS Conference 2019 Conference Paper

PAC-Bayes Un-Expected Bernstein Inequality

  • Zakaria Mhammedi
  • Peter Grünwald
  • Benjamin Guedj

We present a new PAC-Bayesian generalization bound. Standard bounds contain a $\sqrt{L_n \cdot \KL/n}$ complexity term which dominates unless $L_n$, the empirical error of the learning algorithm's randomized predictions, vanishes. We manage to replace $L_n$ by a term which vanishes in many more situations, essentially whenever the employed learning algorithm is sufficiently stable on the dataset at hand. Our new bound consistently beats state-of-the-art bounds both on a toy example and on UCI datasets (with large enough $n$). Theoretically, unlike existing bounds, our new bound can be expected to converge to $0$ faster whenever a Bernstein/Tsybakov condition holds, thus connecting PAC-Bayesian generalization and {\em excess risk\/} bounds---for the latter it has long been known that faster convergence can be obtained under Bernstein conditions. Our main technical tool is a new concentration inequality which is like Bernstein's but with $X^2$ taken outside its expectation.

NeurIPS Conference 2016 Conference Paper

Combining Adversarial Guarantees and Stochastic Fast Rates in Online Learning

  • Wouter Koolen
  • Peter Grünwald
  • Tim van Erven

We consider online learning algorithms that guarantee worst-case regret rates in adversarial environments (so they can be deployed safely and will perform robustly), yet adapt optimally to favorable stochastic environments (so they will perform well in a variety of settings of practical importance). We quantify the friendliness of stochastic environments by means of the well-known Bernstein (a. k. a. generalized Tsybakov margin) condition. For two recent algorithms (Squint for the Hedge setting and MetaGrad for online convex optimization) we show that the particular form of their data-dependent individual-sequence regret guarantees implies that they adapt automatically to the Bernstein parameters of the stochastic environment. We prove that these algorithms attain fast rates in their respective settings both in expectation and with high probability.

NeurIPS Conference 2014 Conference Paper

Learning the Learning Rate for Prediction with Expert Advice

  • Wouter Koolen
  • Tim van Erven
  • Peter Grünwald

Most standard algorithms for prediction with expert advice depend on a parameter called the learning rate. This learning rate needs to be large enough to fit the data well, but small enough to prevent overfitting. For the exponential weights algorithm, a sequence of prior work has established theoretical guarantees for higher and higher data-dependent tunings of the learning rate, which allow for increasingly aggressive learning. But in practice such theoretical tunings often still perform worse (as measured by their regret) than ad hoc tuning with an even higher learning rate. To close the gap between theory and practice we introduce an approach to learn the learning rate. Up to a factor that is at most (poly)logarithmic in the number of experts and the inverse of the learning rate, our method performs as well as if we would know the empirically best learning rate from a large range that includes both conservative small values and values that are much higher than those for which formal guarantees were previously available. Our method employs a grid of learning rates, yet runs in linear time regardless of the size of the grid.

NeurIPS Conference 2012 Conference Paper

Mixability in Statistical Learning

  • Tim Erven
  • Peter Grünwald
  • Mark Reid
  • Robert Williamson

Statistical learning and sequential prediction are two different but related formalisms to study the quality of predictions. Mapping out their relations and transferring ideas is an active area of investigation. We provide another piece of the puzzle by showing that an important concept in sequential prediction, the mixability of a loss, has a natural counterpart in the statistical setting, which we call stochastic mixability. Just as ordinary mixability characterizes fast rates for the worst-case regret in sequential prediction, stochastic mixability characterizes fast rates in statistical learning. We show that, in the special case of log-loss, stochastic mixability reduces to a well-known (but usually unnamed) martingale condition, which is used in existing convergence theorems for minimum description length and Bayesian inference. In the case of 0/1-loss, it reduces to the margin condition of Mammen and Tsybakov, and in the case that the model under consideration contains all possible predictors, it is equivalent to ordinary mixability.

NeurIPS Conference 2011 Conference Paper

Adaptive Hedge

  • Tim Erven
  • Wouter Koolen
  • Steven Rooij
  • Peter Grünwald

Most methods for decision-theoretic online learning are based on the Hedge algorithm, which takes a parameter called the learning rate. In most previous analyses the learning rate was carefully tuned to obtain optimal worst-case performance, leading to suboptimal performance on easy instances, for example when there exists an action that is significantly better than all others. We propose a new way of setting the learning rate, which adapts to the difficulty of the learning problem: in the worst case our procedure still guarantees optimal performance, but on easy instances it achieves much smaller regret. In particular, our adaptive method achieves constant regret in a probabilistic setting, when there exists an action that on average obtains strictly smaller loss than all other actions. We also provide a simulation study comparing our approach to existing methods.

UAI Conference 2008 Conference Paper

A Game-Theoretic Analysis of Updating Sets of Probabilities

  • Peter Grünwald
  • Joseph Y. Halpern

We consider how an agent should update her uncertainty when it is represented by a set P of probability distributions and the agent observes that a random variable X takes on value x, given that the agent makes decisions using the minimax criterion, perhaps the best-studied and most commonly-used criterion in the literature. We adopt a game-theoretic framework, where the agent plays against a bookie, who chooses some distribution from P. We consider two reasonable games that differ in what the bookie knows when he makes his choice. Anomalies that have been observed before, like time inconsistency, can be understood as arising because different games are being played, against bookies with different information. We characterize the important special cases in which the optimal decision rules according to the minimax criterion amount to either conditioning or simply ignoring the information. Finally, we consider the relationship between conditioning and calibration when uncertainty is described by sets of probabilities.

NeurIPS Conference 2007 Conference Paper

Catching Up Faster in Bayesian Model Selection and Model Averaging

  • Tim Erven
  • Steven Rooij
  • Peter Grünwald

Bayesian model averaging, model selection and their approximations such as BIC are generally statistically consistent, but sometimes achieve slower rates of con- vergence than other methods such as AIC and leave-one-out cross-validation. On the other hand, these other methods can be inconsistent. We identify the catch-up phenomenon as a novel explanation for the slow convergence of Bayesian meth- ods. Based on this analysis we define the switch-distribution, a modification of the Bayesian model averaging distribution. We prove that in many situations model selection and prediction based on the switch-distribution is both consistent and achieves optimal convergence rates, thereby resolving the AIC-BIC dilemma. The method is practical; we give an efficient algorithm.

NeurIPS Conference 2005 Conference Paper

Generalization to Unseen Cases

  • Teemu Roos
  • Peter Grünwald
  • Petri Myllymäki
  • Henry Tirri

We analyze classification error on unseen cases, i. e. cases that are different from those in the training set. Unlike standard generalization error, this off-training-set error may differ significantly from the empirical error with high probability even with large sample sizes. We derive a datadependent bound on the difference between off-training-set and standard generalization error. Our result is based on a new bound on the missing mass, which for small samples is stronger than existing bounds based on Good-Turing estimators. As we demonstrate on UCI data-sets, our bound gives nontrivial generalization guarantees in many practical cases. In light of these results, we show that certain claims made in the No Free Lunch literature are overly pessimistic.

UAI Conference 2004 Conference Paper

When Ignorance is Bliss

  • Peter Grünwald
  • Joseph Y. Halpern

It is commonly-accepted wisdom that more information is better, and that information should never be ignored. Here we argue, using both a Bayesian and a non-Bayesian analysis, that in some situations you are better off ignoring information if your uncertainty is represented by a set of probability measures. These include situations in which the information is relevant for the prediction task at hand. In the non-Bayesian analysis, we show how ignoring information avoids dilation, the phenomenon that additional pieces of information sometimes lead to an increase in uncertainty. In the Bayesian analysis, we show that for small sample sizes and certain prediction tasks, the Bayesian posterior based on a noninformative prior yields worse predictions than simply ignoring the given information.

UAI Conference 2002 Conference Paper

Updating Probabilities

  • Peter Grünwald
  • Joseph Y. Halpern

As examples such as the Monty Hall puzzle show, applying conditioning to update a probability distribution on a ``naive space', which does not take into account the protocol used, can often lead to counterintuitive results. Here we examine why. A criterion known as CAR (coarsening at random) in the statistical literature characterizes when ``naive' conditioning in a naive space works. We show that the CAR condition holds rather infrequently. We then consider more generalized notions of update such as Jeffrey conditioning and minimizing relative entropy (MRE). We give a generalization of the CAR condition that characterizes when Jeffrey conditioning leads to appropriate answers, but show that there are no such conditions for MRE. This generalizes and interconnects previous results obtained in the literature on CAR and MRE.

UAI Conference 2000 Conference Paper

Maximum Entropy and the Glasses You are Looking Through

  • Peter Grünwald

We give an interpretation of the Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt) Principle in game-theoretic terms. Based on this interpretation, we make a formal distinction between different ways of {em applying/} Maximum Entropy distributions. MaxEnt has frequently been criticized on the grounds that it leads to highly representation dependent results. Our distinction allows us to avoid this problem in many cases.