Bayesian optimization (BO) is a popular approach to optimize expensive-to-evaluate black-box functions. A significant challenge in BO is to scale to high-dimensional parameter spaces while retaining sample efficiency. A solution considered in existing literature is to embed the high-dimensional space in a lower-dimensional manifold, often via a random linear embedding. In this paper, we identify several crucial issues and misconceptions about the use of linear embeddings for BO. We study the properties of linear embeddings from the literature and show that some of the design choices in current approaches adversely impact their performance. We show empirically that properly addressing these issues significantly improves the efficacy of linear embeddings for BO on a range of problems, including learning a gait policy for robot locomotion.
We present MLRG Deep Curvature suite, a PyTorch-based, open-source package for analysis and visualisation of neural network curvature and loss landscape. Despite of providing rich information into properties of neural network and useful for a various designed tasks, curvature information is still not made sufficient use for various reasons, and our method aims to bridge this gap. We present a primer, including its main practical desiderata and common misconceptions, of \textit{Lanczos algorithm}, the theoretical backbone of our package, and present a series of examples based on synthetic toy examples and realistic modern neural networks tested on CIFAR datasets, and show the superiority of our package against existing competing approaches for the similar purposes.
Empirical research in Natural Language Processing (NLP) has adopted a narrow set of principles for assessing hypotheses, relying mainly on p-value computation, which suffers from several known issues. While alternative proposals have been well-debated and adopted in other fields, they remain rarely discussed or used within the NLP community. We address this gap by contrasting various hypothesis assessment techniques, especially those not commonly used in the field (such as evaluations based on Bayesian inference). Since these statistical techniques differ in the hypotheses they can support, we argue that practitioners should first decide their target hypothesis before choosing an assessment method. This is crucial because common fallacies, misconceptions, and misinterpretation surrounding hypothesis assessment methods often stem from a discrepancy between what one would like to claim versus what the method used actually assesses. Our survey reveals that these issues are omnipresent in the NLP research community. As a step forward, we provide best practices and guidelines tailored to NLP research, as well as an easy-to-use package called 'HyBayes' for Bayesian assessment of hypotheses, complementing existing tools.
Cross-lingual word embeddings (CLEs) enable multilingual modeling of meaning and facilitate cross-lingual transfer of NLP models. Despite their ubiquitous usage in downstream tasks, recent increasingly popular projection-based CLE models are almost exclusively evaluated on a single task only: bilingual lexicon induction (BLI). Even BLI evaluations vary greatly, hindering our ability to correctly interpret performance and properties of different CLE models. In this work, we make the first step towards a comprehensive evaluation of cross-lingual word embeddings. We thoroughly evaluate both supervised and unsupervised CLE models on a large number of language pairs in the BLI task and three downstream tasks, providing new insights concerning the ability of cutting-edge CLE models to support cross-lingual NLP. We empirically demonstrate that the performance of CLE models largely depends on the task at hand and that optimizing CLE models for BLI can result in deteriorated downstream performance. We indicate the most robust supervised and unsupervised CLE models and emphasize the need to reassess existing baselines, which still display competitive performance across the board. We hope that our work will catalyze further work on CLE evaluation and model analysis.
In modern computer science education, massive open online courses (MOOCs) log thousands of hours of data about how students solve coding challenges. Being so rich in data, these platforms have garnered the interest of the machine learning community, with many new algorithms attempting to autonomously provide feedback to help future students learn. But what about those first hundred thousand students? In most educational contexts (i.e. classrooms), assignments do not have enough historical data for supervised learning. In this paper, we introduce a human-in-the-loop "rubric sampling" approach to tackle the "zero shot" feedback challenge. We are able to provide autonomous feedback for the first students working on an introductory programming assignment with accuracy that substantially outperforms data-hungry algorithms and approaches human level fidelity. Rubric sampling requires minimal teacher effort, can associate feedback with specific parts of a student's solution and can articulate a student's misconceptions in the language of the instructor. Deep learning inference enables rubric sampling to further improve as more assignment specific student data is acquired. We demonstrate our results on a novel dataset from Code.org, the world's largest programming education platform.
Generative adversarial networks (GANs) form a generative modeling approach known for producing appealing samples, but they are notably difficult to train. One common way to tackle this issue has been to propose new formulations of the GAN objective. Yet, surprisingly few studies have looked at optimization methods designed for this adversarial training. In this work, we cast GAN optimization problems in the general variational inequality framework. Tapping into the mathematical programming literature, we counter some common misconceptions about the difficulties of saddle point optimization and propose to extend techniques designed for variational inequalities to the training of GANs. We apply averaging, extrapolation and a computationally cheaper variant that we call extrapolation from the past to the stochastic gradient method (SGD) and Adam.
We investigate the design challenges of constructing effective and efficient neural sequence labeling systems, by reproducing twelve neural sequence labeling models, which include most of the state-of-the-art structures, and conduct a systematic model comparison on three benchmarks (i.e. NER, Chunking, and POS tagging). Misconceptions and inconsistent conclusions in existing literature are examined and clarified under statistical experiments. In the comparison and analysis process, we reach several practical conclusions which can be useful to practitioners.