Paper detail

The gap between theory and practice in function approximation with deep neural networks

Deep learning (DL) is transforming industry as decision-making processes are being automated by deep neural networks (DNNs) trained on real-world data. Driven partly by rapidly-expanding literature on DNN approximation theory showing they can approximate a rich variety of functions, such tools are increasingly being considered for problems in scientific computing. Yet, unlike traditional algorithms in this field, little is known about DNNs from the principles of numerical analysis, e.g., stability, accuracy, computational efficiency and sample complexity. In this paper we introduce a computational framework for examining DNNs in practice, and use it to study empirical performance with regard to these issues. We study performance of DNNs of different widths & depths on test functions in various dimensions, including smooth and piecewise smooth functions. We also compare DL against best-in-class methods for smooth function approx. based on compressed sensing (CS). Our main conclusion from these experiments is that there is a crucial gap between the approximation theory of DNNs and their practical performance, with trained DNNs performing relatively poorly on functions for which there are strong approximation results (e.g. smooth functions), yet performing well in comparison to best-in-class methods for other functions. To analyze this gap further, we provide some theoretical insights. We establish a practical existence theorem, asserting existence of a DNN architecture and training procedure that offers the same performance as CS. This establishes a key theoretical benchmark, showing the gap can be closed, albeit via a strategy guaranteed to perform as well as, but no better than, current best-in-class schemes. Nevertheless, it demonstrates the promise of practical DNN approx., by highlighting potential for better schemes through careful design of DNN architectures and training strategies.

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.