BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Pritish Kamath

Pritish Kamath contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningCryptography and SecurityData Structures and AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceComputational Complexity

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
8works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Connect the Dots: Tighter Discrete Approximations of Privacy Loss Distributions

The privacy loss distribution (PLD) provides a tight characterization of the privacy loss of a mechanism in the context of differential privacy (DP). Recent work has shown that PLD-based accounting allows for tighter $(\varepsilon, δ)$-DP guarantees for many popular mechanisms compared to other known methods. A key question in PLD-based accounting is how to approximate any (potentially continuous) PLD with a PLD over any specified discrete support. We present a novel approach to this problem. Our approach supports both pessimistic estimation, which overestimates the hockey-stick divergence (i.e., $δ$) for any value of $\varepsilon$, and optimistic estimation, which underestimates the hockey-stick divergence. Moreover, we show that our pessimistic estimate is the best possible among all pessimistic estimates. Experimental evaluation shows that our approach can work with much larger discretization intervals while keeping a similar error bound compared to previous approaches and yet give a better approximation than existing methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Do More Negative Samples Necessarily Hurt in Contrastive Learning?

Recent investigations in noise contrastive estimation suggest, both empirically as well as theoretically, that while having more "negative samples" in the contrastive loss improves downstream classification performance initially, beyond a threshold, it hurts downstream performance due to a "collision-coverage" trade-off. But is such a phenomenon inherent in contrastive learning? We show in a simple theoretical setting, where positive pairs are generated by sampling from the underlying latent class (introduced by Saunshi et al. (ICML 2019)), that the downstream performance of the representation optimizing the (population) contrastive loss in fact does not degrade with the number of negative samples. Along the way, we give a structural characterization of the optimal representation in our framework, for noise contrastive estimation. We also provide empirical support for our theoretical results on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 datasets.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Faster Privacy Accounting via Evolving Discretization

We introduce a new algorithm for numerical composition of privacy random variables, useful for computing the accurate differential privacy parameters for composition of mechanisms. Our algorithm achieves a running time and memory usage of $\mathrm{polylog}(k)$ for the task of self-composing a mechanism, from a broad class of mechanisms, $k$ times; this class, e.g., includes the sub-sampled Gaussian mechanism, that appears in the analysis of differentially private stochastic gradient descent. By comparison, recent work by Gopi et al. (NeurIPS 2021) has obtained a running time of $\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{k})$ for the same task. Our approach extends to the case of composing $k$ different mechanisms in the same class, improving upon their running time and memory usage from $\widetilde{O}(k^{1.5})$ to $\widetilde{O}(k)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

On the Power of Differentiable Learning versus PAC and SQ Learning

We study the power of learning via mini-batch stochastic gradient descent (SGD) on the population loss, and batch Gradient Descent (GD) on the empirical loss, of a differentiable model or neural network, and ask what learning problems can be learnt using these paradigms. We show that SGD and GD can always simulate learning with statistical queries (SQ), but their ability to go beyond that depends on the precision $ρ$ of the gradient calculations relative to the minibatch size $b$ (for SGD) and sample size $m$ (for GD). With fine enough precision relative to minibatch size, namely when $b ρ$ is small enough, SGD can go beyond SQ learning and simulate any sample-based learning algorithm and thus its learning power is equivalent to that of PAC learning; this extends prior work that achieved this result for $b=1$. Similarly, with fine enough precision relative to the sample size $m$, GD can also simulate any sample-based learning algorithm based on $m$ samples. In particular, with polynomially many bits of precision (i.e. when $ρ$ is exponentially small), SGD and GD can both simulate PAC learning regardless of the mini-batch size. On the other hand, when $b ρ^2$ is large enough, the power of SGD is equivalent to that of SQ learning.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Does Invariant Risk Minimization Capture Invariance?

We show that the Invariant Risk Minimization (IRM) formulation of Arjovsky et al. (2019) can fail to capture "natural" invariances, at least when used in its practical "linear" form, and even on very simple problems which directly follow the motivating examples for IRM. This can lead to worse generalization on new environments, even when compared to unconstrained ERM. The issue stems from a significant gap between the linear variant (as in their concrete method IRMv1) and the full non-linear IRM formulation. Additionally, even when capturing the "right" invariances, we show that it is possible for IRM to learn a sub-optimal predictor, due to the loss function not being invariant across environments. The issues arise even when measuring invariance on the population distributions, but are exacerbated by the fact that IRM is extremely fragile to sampling.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Quantifying the Benefit of Using Differentiable Learning over Tangent Kernels

We study the relative power of learning with gradient descent on differentiable models, such as neural networks, versus using the corresponding tangent kernels. We show that under certain conditions, gradient descent achieves small error only if a related tangent kernel method achieves a non-trivial advantage over random guessing (a.k.a. weak learning), though this advantage might be very small even when gradient descent can achieve arbitrarily high accuracy. Complementing this, we show that without these conditions, gradient descent can in fact learn with small error even when no kernel method, in particular using the tangent kernel, can achieve a non-trivial advantage over random guessing.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Approximate is Good Enough: Probabilistic Variants of Dimensional and Margin Complexity

We present and study approximate notions of dimensional and margin complexity, which correspond to the minimal dimension or norm of an embedding required to approximate, rather then exactly represent, a given hypothesis class. We show that such notions are not only sufficient for learning using linear predictors or a kernel, but unlike the exact variants, are also necessary. Thus they are better suited for discussing limitations of linear or kernel methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the Complexity of Modulo-q Arguments and the Chevalley-Warning Theorem

We study the search problem class $\mathrm{PPA}_q$ defined as a modulo-$q$ analog of the well-known $\textit{polynomial parity argument}$ class $\mathrm{PPA}$ introduced by Papadimitriou '94. Our first result shows that this class can be characterized in terms of $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ for prime $p$. Our main result is to establish that an $\textit{explicit}$ version of a search problem associated to the Chevalley--Warning theorem is complete for $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ for prime $p$. This problem is $\textit{natural}$ in that it does not explicitly involve circuits as part of the input. It is the first such complete problem for $\mathrm{PPA}_p$ when $p \ge 3$. Finally we discuss connections between Chevalley-Warning theorem and the well-studied $\textit{short integer solution}$ problem and survey the structural properties of $\mathrm{PPA}_q$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access