Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.

Chris Mingard

dblp:249/5755 · also Chris E. Mingard · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Learning theory · 53% Deep learning architectures and training · 25% Representation and self-supervised learning · 12%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Learning theory
neural network theory
0.822024
Feature Learning and Signal Propagation in Deep Neural Networks · ICML 2022
An exactly solvable model for emergence and scaling laws in the multitask sparse parity problem · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws
0.812024
An exactly solvable model for emergence and scaling laws in the multitask sparse parity problem · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory › feature learning theory
feature learning dynamics
0.612022
Feature Learning and Signal Propagation in Deep Neural Networks · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation matching › feature alignment
layer alignment
0.612022
Feature Learning and Signal Propagation in Deep Neural Networks · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
inductive bias
0.512021
Is SGD a Bayesian sampler? Well, almost · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
overparameterized neural network
0.512021
Is SGD a Bayesian sampler? Well, almost · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent
0.512021
Is SGD a Bayesian sampler? Well, almost · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

sparse parity · 0.8multi-task learning · 0.8analytic model · 0.8tangent feature analysis · 0.6gaussian process · 0.5bayesian inference · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 An exactly solvable model for emergence and scaling laws in the multitask sparse parity problem
abstract
Deep learning models can exhibit what appears to be a sudden ability to solve a new problem as training time, training data, or model size increases, a phenomenon known as emergence. In this paper, we present a framework where each new ability (a skill) is represented as a basis function. We solve a simple multi-linear model in this skill-basis, finding analytic expressions for the emergence of new skills, as well as for scaling laws of the loss with training time, data size, model size, and optimal compute. We compare our detailed calculations to direct simulations of a two-layer neural network trained on multitask sparse parity, where the tasks in the dataset are distributed according to a power-law. Our simple model captures, using a single fit parameter, the sigmoidal emergence of multiple new skills as training time, data size or model size increases in the neural network.
Yoonsoo Nam, Nayara Fonseca, Seok Hyeong Lee, Chris Mingard, Ard A. Louis
NeurIPS4
2022 Feature Learning and Signal Propagation in Deep Neural Networks
abstract
Recent work by Baratin et al. (2021) sheds light on an intriguing pattern that occurs during the training of deep neural networks: some layers align much more with data compared to other layers (where the alignment is defined as the normalize euclidean product of the tangent features matrix and the data labels matrix). The curve of the alignment as a function of layer index (generally) exhibits a ascent-descent pattern where the maximum is reached for some hidden layer. In this work, we provide the first explanation for this phenomenon. We introduce the Equilibrium Hypothesis which connects this alignment pattern to signal propagation in deep neural networks. Our experiments demonstrate an excellent match with the theoretical predictions.
Yizhang Lou, Chris Mingard, Soufiane Hayou
ICML2
2021 Is SGD a Bayesian sampler? Well, almost
abstract
Deep neural networks (DNNs) generalise remarkably well in the overparameterised regime, suggesting a strong inductive bias towards functions with low generalisation error. We empirically investigate this bias by calculating, for a range of architectures and datasets, the probability $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ that an overparameterised DNN, trained with stochastic gradient descent (SGD) or one of its variants, converges on a function $f$ consistent with a training set $S$. We also use Gaussian processes to estimate the Bayesian posterior probability $P_{B}(f\mid S)$ that the DNN expresses $f$ upon random sampling of its parameters, conditioned on $S$. Our main findings are that $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ correlates remarkably well with $P_{B}(f\mid S)$ and that $P_{B}(f\mid S)$ is strongly biased towards low-error and low complexity functions. These results imply that strong inductive bias in the parameter-function map (which determines $P_{B}(f\mid S)$), rather than a special property of SGD, is the primary explanation for why DNNs generalise so well in the overparameterised regime. While our results suggest that the Bayesian posterior $P_{B}(f\mid S)$ is the first order determinant of $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$, there remain second order differences that are sensitive to hyperparameter tuning. A function probability picture, based on $P_{SGD}(f\mid S)$ and/or $P_{B}(f\mid S)$, can shed light on the way that variations in architecture or hyperparameter settings such as batch size, learning rate, and optimiser choice, affect DNN performance.
Chris Mingard, Guillermo Valle Pérez, Joar Skalse, Ard A. Louis
J. Mach. Learn. Res.1