Researcher profile

Tim van Erven

Tim van Erven contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
8topics
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

7 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Between Stochastic and Adversarial Online Convex Optimization: Improved Regret Bounds via Smoothness

Stochastic and adversarial data are two widely studied settings in online learning. But many optimization tasks are neither i.i.d. nor fully adversarial, which makes it of fundamental interest to get a better theoretical understanding of the world between these extremes. In this work we establish novel regret bounds for online convex optimization in a setting that interpolates between stochastic i.i.d. and fully adversarial losses. By exploiting smoothness of the expected losses, these bounds replace a dependence on the maximum gradient length by the variance of the gradients, which was previously known only for linear losses. In addition, they weaken the i.i.d. assumption by allowing, for example, adversarially poisoned rounds, which were previously considered in the expert and bandit setting. Our results extend this to the online convex optimization framework. In the fully i.i.d. case, our bounds match the rates one would expect from results in stochastic acceleration, and in the fully adversarial case they gracefully deteriorate to match the minimax regret. We further provide lower bounds showing that our regret upper bounds are tight for all intermediate regimes in terms of the stochastic variance and the adversarial variation of the loss gradients.

preprint2022arXiv

Modifying Squint for Prediction with Expert Advice in a Changing Environment

We provide a new method for online learning, specifically prediction with expert advice, in a changing environment. In a non-changing environment the Squint algorithm has been designed to always function at least as well as other known algorithms and in specific cases it functions much better. However, when using a conventional black-box algorithm to make Squint suitable for a changing environment, it loses its beneficial properties. Hence, we provide a new algorithm, Squint-CE, which is suitable for a changing environment and preserves the properties of Squint.

preprint2022arXiv

Scale-free Unconstrained Online Learning for Curved Losses

A sequence of works in unconstrained online convex optimisation have investigated the possibility of adapting simultaneously to the norm $U$ of the comparator and the maximum norm $G$ of the gradients. In full generality, matching upper and lower bounds are known which show that this comes at the unavoidable cost of an additive $G U^3$, which is not needed when either $G$ or $U$ is known in advance. Surprisingly, recent results by Kempka et al. (2019) show that no such price for adaptivity is needed in the specific case of $1$-Lipschitz losses like the hinge loss. We follow up on this observation by showing that there is in fact never a price to pay for adaptivity if we specialise to any of the other common supervised online learning losses: our results cover log loss, (linear and non-parametric) logistic regression, square loss prediction, and (linear and non-parametric) least-squares regression. We also fill in several gaps in the literature by providing matching lower bounds with an explicit dependence on $U$. In all cases we obtain scale-free algorithms, which are suitably invariant under rescaling of the data. Our general goal is to establish achievable rates without concern for computational efficiency, but for linear logistic regression we also provide an adaptive method that is as efficient as the recent non-adaptive algorithm by Agarwal et al. (2021).

preprint2020arXiv

Fast Exact Bayesian Inference for Sparse Signals in the Normal Sequence Model

We consider exact algorithms for Bayesian inference with model selection priors (including spike-and-slab priors) in the sparse normal sequence model. Because the best existing exact algorithm becomes numerically unstable for sample sizes over n=500, there has been much attention for alternative approaches like approximate algorithms (Gibbs sampling, variational Bayes, etc.), shrinkage priors (e.g. the Horseshoe prior and the Spike-and-Slab LASSO) or empirical Bayesian methods. However, by introducing algorithmic ideas from online sequential prediction, we show that exact calculations are feasible for much larger sample sizes: for general model selection priors we reach n=25000, and for certain spike-and-slab priors we can easily reach n=100000. We further prove a de Finetti-like result for finite sample sizes that characterizes exactly which model selection priors can be expressed as spike-and-slab priors. The computational speed and numerical accuracy of the proposed methods are demonstrated in experiments on simulated data, on a differential gene expression data set, and to compare the effect of multiple hyper-parameter settings in the beta-binomial prior. In our experimental evaluation we compute guaranteed bounds on the numerical accuracy of all new algorithms, which shows that the proposed methods are numerically reliable whereas an alternative based on long division is not.

preprint2010arXiv

Freezing and Sleeping: Tracking Experts that Learn by Evolving Past Posteriors

A problem posed by Freund is how to efficiently track a small pool of experts out of a much larger set. This problem was solved when Bousquet and Warmuth introduced their mixing past posteriors (MPP) algorithm in 2001. In Freund's problem the experts would normally be considered black boxes. However, in this paper we re-examine Freund's problem in case the experts have internal structure that enables them to learn. In this case the problem has two possible interpretations: should the experts learn from all data or only from the subsequence on which they are being tracked? The MPP algorithm solves the first case. Our contribution is to generalise MPP to address the second option. The results we obtain apply to any expert structure that can be formalised using (expert) hidden Markov models. Curiously enough, for our interpretation there are \emph{two} natural reference schemes: freezing and sleeping. For each scheme, we provide an efficient prediction strategy and prove the relevant loss bound.

preprint2010arXiv

Rényi Divergence and Majorization

Rényi divergence is related to Rényi entropy much like information divergence (also called Kullback-Leibler divergence or relative entropy) is related to Shannon's entropy, and comes up in many settings. It was introduced by Rényi as a measure of information that satisfies almost the same axioms as information divergence. We review the most important properties of Rényi divergence, including its relation to some other distances. We show how Rényi divergence appears when the theory of majorization is generalized from the finite to the continuous setting. Finally, Rényi divergence plays a role in analyzing the number of binary questions required to guess the values of a sequence of random variables.

preprint2010arXiv

Switching between Hidden Markov Models using Fixed Share

In prediction with expert advice the goal is to design online prediction algorithms that achieve small regret (additional loss on the whole data) compared to a reference scheme. In the simplest such scheme one compares to the loss of the best expert in hindsight. A more ambitious goal is to split the data into segments and compare to the best expert on each segment. This is appropriate if the nature of the data changes between segments. The standard fixed-share algorithm is fast and achieves small regret compared to this scheme. Fixed share treats the experts as black boxes: there are no assumptions about how they generate their predictions. But if the experts are learning, the following question arises: should the experts learn from all data or only from data in their own segment? The original algorithm naturally addresses the first case. Here we consider the second option, which is more appropriate exactly when the nature of the data changes between segments. In general extending fixed share to this second case will slow it down by a factor of T on T outcomes. We show, however, that no such slowdown is necessary if the experts are hidden Markov models.