Paper detail

Efficacy of regularized multi-task learning based on SVM models

This paper investigates the efficacy of a regularized multi-task learning (MTL) framework based on SVM (M-SVM) to answer whether MTL always provides reliable results and how MTL outperforms independent learning. We first find that M-SVM is Bayes risk consistent in the limit of large sample size. This implies that despite the task dissimilarities, M-SVM always produces a reliable decision rule for each task in terms of misclassification error when the data size is large enough. Furthermore, we find that the task-interaction vanishes as the data size goes to infinity, and the convergence rates of M-SVM and its single-task counterpart have the same upper bound. The former suggests that M-SVM cannot improve the limit classifier's performance; based on the latter, we conjecture that the optimal convergence rate is not improved when the task number is fixed. As a novel insight of MTL, our theoretical and experimental results achieved an excellent agreement that the benefit of the MTL methods lies in the improvement of the pre-convergence-rate factor (PCR, to be denoted in Section III) rather than the convergence rate. Moreover, this improvement of PCR factors is more significant when the data size is small.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.