Paper detail

Dimensionality reduction, regularization, and generalization in overparameterized regressions

Overparameterization in deep learning is powerful: Very large models fit the training data perfectly and yet often generalize well. This realization brought back the study of linear models for regression, including ordinary least squares (OLS), which, like deep learning, shows a &#34;double-descent&#34; behavior: (1) The risk (expected out-of-sample prediction error) can grow arbitrarily when the number of parameters $p$ approaches the number of samples $n$, and (2) the risk decreases with $p$ for $p>n$, sometimes achieving a lower value than the lowest risk for $p<n$. The divergence of the risk for OLS can be avoided with regularization. In this work, we show that for some data models it can also be avoided with a PCA-based dimensionality reduction (PCA-OLS, also known as principal component regression). We provide non-asymptotic bounds for the risk of PCA-OLS by considering the alignments of the population and empirical principal components. We show that dimensionality reduction improves robustness while OLS is arbitrarily susceptible to adversarial attacks, particularly in the overparameterized regime. We compare PCA-OLS theoretically and empirically with a wide range of projection-based methods, including random projections, partial least squares (PLS), and certain classes of linear two-layer neural networks. These comparisons are made for different data generation models to assess the sensitivity to signal-to-noise and the alignment of regression coefficients with the features. We find that methods in which the projection depends on the training data can outperform methods where the projections are chosen independently of the training data, even those with oracle knowledge of population quantities, another seemingly paradoxical phenomenon that has been identified previously. This suggests that overparameterization may not be necessary for good generalization.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.