Paper detail

Tighter expected generalization error bounds via Wasserstein distance

This work presents several expected generalization error bounds based on the Wasserstein distance. More specifically, it introduces full-dataset, single-letter, and random-subset bounds, and their analogues in the randomized subsample setting from Steinke and Zakynthinou [1]. Moreover, when the loss function is bounded and the geometry of the space is ignored by the choice of the metric in the Wasserstein distance, these bounds recover from below (and thus, are tighter than) current bounds based on the relative entropy. In particular, they generate new, non-vacuous bounds based on the relative entropy. Therefore, these results can be seen as a bridge between works that account for the geometry of the hypothesis space and those based on the relative entropy, which is agnostic to such geometry. Furthermore, it is shown how to produce various new bounds based on different information measures (e.g., the lautum information or several $f$-divergences) based on these bounds and how to derive similar bounds with respect to the backward channel using the presented proof techniques.

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.