Learning explanations that are hard to vary
About
In this paper, we investigate the principle that `good explanations are hard to vary' in the context of deep learning. We show that averaging gradients across examples -- akin to a logical OR of patterns -- can favor memorization and `patchwork' solutions that sew together different strategies, instead of identifying invariances. To inspect this, we first formalize a notion of consistency for minima of the loss surface, which measures to what extent a minimum appears only when examples are pooled. We then propose and experimentally validate a simple alternative algorithm based on a logical AND, that focuses on invariances and prevents memorization in a set of real-world tasks. Finally, using a synthetic dataset with a clear distinction between invariant and spurious mechanisms, we dissect learning signals and compare this approach to well-established regularizers.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Domain Generalization | VLCS | Accuracy78.1 | 347 | |
| Domain Generalization | PACS | Accuracy84.4 | 323 | |
| Domain Generalization | OfficeHome | Accuracy65.6 | 294 | |
| Domain Generalization | DomainNet | Accuracy37.2 | 228 | |
| Domain Generalization | TerraIncognita | Accuracy44.6 | 121 | |
| Domain Generalization | DomainBed | CMST Accuracy51.3 | 14 | |
| Open Domain Generalization | Multi-Datasets Sketch (test) | Accuracy29.54 | 12 | |
| Open Domain Generalization | Multi-Datasets Clipart (test) | Accuracy35.33 | 12 | |
| Image Classification | Office-Home Product Open Domain Setting | Accuracy54.32 | 12 | |
| Image Classification | Office-Home Real World Open Domain Setting | Accuracy61.82 | 12 |