Research Group Thomas Nagler

Hyperparameter optimization is crucial for obtaining peak performance of machine learning models. The standard protocol evaluates various hyperparameter configurations using a resampling estimate of the generalization error to guide optimization and select a final hyperparameter configuration. Without much evidence, paired resampling splits, i.e., either a fixed train-validation split or a fixed cross-validation scheme, are often recommended. We show that, surprisingly, reshuffling the splits for every configuration often improves the final model’s generalization performance on unseen data. Our theoretical analysis explains how reshuffling affects the asymptotic behavior of the validation loss surface and provides a bound on the expected regret in the limiting regime. This bound connects the potential benefits of reshuffling to the signal and noise characteristics of the underlying optimization problem. We confirm our theoretical results in a controlled simulation study and demonstrate the practical usefulness of reshuffling in a large-scale, realistic hyperparameter optimization experiment. While reshuffling leads to test performances that are competitive with using fixed splits, it drastically improves results for a single train-validation holdout protocol and can often make holdout become competitive with standard CV while being computationally cheaper.

Prior-data fitted networks (PFNs), especially TabPFN, have shown significant promise in tabular data prediction. However, their scalability is limited by the quadratic complexity of the transformer architecture’s attention across training points. In this work, we propose a method to localize TabPFN, which embeds data points into a learned representation and performs nearest neighbor selection in this space. We evaluate it across six datasets, demonstrating its superior performance over standard TabPFN when scaling to larger datasets. We also explore its design choices and analyze the bias-variance trade-off of this localization method, showing that it reduces bias while maintaining manageable variance. This work opens up a pathway for scaling TabPFN to arbitrarily large tabular datasets.

We consider high-dimensional estimation problems where the number of parameters diverges with the sample size. General conditions are established for consistency, uniqueness, and asymptotic normality in both unpenalized and penalized estimation settings. The conditions are weak and accommodate a broad class of estimation problems, including ones with non-convex and group structured penalties. The wide applicability of the results is illustrated through diverse examples, including generalized linear models, multi-sample inference, and stepwise estimation procedures.

Climate model large ensembles are an essential research tool for analysing and quantifying natural climate variability and providing robust information for rare extreme events. The models simulated representations of reality are susceptible to bias due to incomplete understanding of physical processes. This paper aims to correct the bias of five climate variables from the CRCM5 Large Ensemble over Central Europe at a 3-hourly temporal resolution. At this high temporal resolution, two variables, precipitation and radiation, exhibit a high share of zero inflation. We propose a novel bias-correction method, VBC (Vine copula bias correction), that models and transfers multivariate dependence structures for zero-inflated margins in the data from its error-prone model domain to a reference domain. VBC estimates the model and reference distribution using vine copulas and corrects the model distribution via (inverse) Rosenblatt transformation. To deal with the variables’ zero-inflated nature, we develop a new vine density decomposition that accommodates such variables and employs an adequately randomized version of the Rosenblatt transform. This novel approach allows for more accurate modelling of multivariate zero-inflated climate data. Compared with state-of-the-art correction methods, VBC is generally the best-performing correction and the most accurate method for correcting zero-inflated events.

When assessing the quality of prediction models in machine learning, confidence intervals (CIs) for the generalization error, which measures predictive performance, are a crucial tool. Luckily, there exist many methods for computing such CIs and new promising approaches are continuously being proposed. Typically, these methods combine various resampling procedures, most popular among them cross-validation and bootstrapping, with different variance estimation techniques. Unfortunately, however, there is currently no consensus on when any of these combinations may be most reliably employed and how they generally compare. In this work, we conduct the first large-scale study comparing CIs for the generalization error - empirically evaluating 13 different methods on a total of 18 tabular regression and classification problems, using four different inducers and a total of eight loss functions. We give an overview of the methodological foundations and inherent challenges of constructing CIs for the generalization error and provide a concise review of all 13 methods in a unified framework. Finally, the CI methods are evaluated in terms of their relative coverage frequency, width, and runtime. Based on these findings, we are able to identify a subset of methods that we would recommend. We also publish the datasets as a benchmarking suite on OpenML and our code on GitHub to serve as a basis for further studies.

The complexity of black-box algorithms can lead to various challenges, including the introduction of biases. These biases present immediate risks in the algorithms’ application. It was, for instance, shown that neural networks can deduce racial information solely from a patient’s X-ray scan, a task beyond the capability of medical experts. If this fact is not known to the medical expert, automatic decision-making based on this algorithm could lead to prescribing a treatment (purely) based on racial information. While current methodologies allow for the ‘‘orthogonalization’’ or ‘’normalization’’ of neural networks with respect to such information, existing approaches are grounded in linear models. Our paper advances the discourse by introducing corrections for non-linearities such as ReLU activations. Our approach also encompasses scalar and tensor-valued predictions, facilitating its integration into neural network architectures. Through extensive experiments, we validate our method’s effectiveness in safeguarding sensitive data in generalized linear models, normalizing convolutional neural networks for metadata, and rectifying pre-existing embeddings for undesired attributes.

The recently developed Prior-Data Fitted Networks (PFNs) have shown very promising results for applications in low-data regimes. The TabPFN model, a special case of PFNs for tabular data, is able to achieve state-of-the-art performance on a variety of classification tasks while producing posterior predictive distributions in mere seconds by in-context learning without the need for learning parameters or hyperparameter tuning. This makes TabPFN a very attractive option for a wide range of domain applications. However, a major drawback of the method is its lack of interpretability. Therefore, we propose several adaptations of popular interpretability methods that we specifically design for TabPFN. By taking advantage of the unique properties of the model, our adaptations allow for more efficient computations than existing implementations. In particular, we show how in-context learning facilitates the estimation of Shapley values by avoiding approximate retraining and enables the use of Leave-One-Covariate-Out (LOCO) even when working with large-scale Transformers. In addition, we demonstrate how data valuation methods can be used to address scalability challenges of TabPFN.

We present a novel approach to uncertainty quantification in classification tasks based on label-wise decomposition of uncertainty measures. This label-wise perspective allows uncertainty to be quantified at the individual class level, thereby improving cost-sensitive decision-making and helping understand the sources of uncertainty. Furthermore, it allows to define total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty on the basis of non-categorical measures such as variance, going beyond common entropy-based measures. In particular, variance-based measures address some of the limitations associated with established methods that have recently been discussed in the literature. We show that our proposed measures adhere to a number of desirable properties. Through empirical evaluation on a variety of benchmark data sets – including applications in the medical domain where accurate uncertainty quantification is crucial – we establish the effectiveness of label-wise uncertainty quantification.

Resampling methods such as the bootstrap have proven invaluable in the field of machine learning. However, the applicability of traditional bootstrap methods is limited when dealing with large streams of dependent data, such as time series or spatially correlated observations. In this paper, we propose a novel bootstrap method that is designed to account for data dependencies and can be executed online, making it particularly suitable for real-time applications. This method is based on an autoregressive sequence of increasingly dependent resampling weights. We prove the theoretical validity of the proposed bootstrap scheme under general conditions. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach through extensive simulations and show that it provides reliable uncertainty quantification even in the presence of complex data dependencies. Our work bridges the gap between classical resampling techniques and the demands of modern data analysis, providing a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners in dynamic, data-rich environments.

Uncertainty quantification is a critical aspect of machine learning models, providing important insights into the reliability of predictions and aiding the decision-making process in real-world applications. This paper proposes a novel way to use variance-based measures to quantify uncertainty on the basis of second-order distributions in classification problems. A distinctive feature of the measures is the ability to reason about uncertainties on a class-based level, which is useful in situations where nuanced decision-making is required. Recalling some properties from the literature, we highlight that the variance-based measures satisfy important (axiomatic) properties. In addition to this axiomatic approach, we present empirical results showing the measures to be effective and competitive to commonly used entropy-based measures.

Semi-supervised learning by self-training heavily relies on pseudo-label selection (PLS). This selection often depends on the initial model fit on labeled data. Early overfitting might thus be propagated to the final model by selecting instances with overconfident but erroneous predictions, often referred to as confirmation bias. This paper introduces BPLS, a Bayesian framework for PLS that aims to mitigate this issue. At its core lies a criterion for selecting instances to label: an analytical approximation of the posterior predictive of pseudo-samples. We derive this selection criterion by proving Bayes-optimality of the posterior predictive of pseudo-samples. We further overcome computational hurdles by approximating the criterion analytically. Its relation to the marginal likelihood allows us to come up with an approximation based on Laplace’s method and the Gaussian integral. We empirically assess BPLS on simulated and real-world data. When faced with high-dimensional data prone to overfitting, BPLS outperforms traditional PLS methods.

Prior-data fitted networks (PFNs) were recently proposed as a new paradigm for machine learning. Instead of training the network to an observed training set, a fixed model is pre-trained offline on small, simulated training sets from a variety of tasks. The pre-trained model is then used to infer class probabilities in-context on fresh training sets with arbitrary size and distribution. Empirically, PFNs achieve state-of-the-art performance on tasks with similar size to the ones used in pre-training. Surprisingly, their accuracy further improves when passed larger data sets during inference. This article establishes a theoretical foundation for PFNs and illuminates the statistical mechanisms governing their behavior. While PFNs are motivated by Bayesian ideas, a purely frequentistic interpretation of PFNs as pre-tuned, but untrained predictors explains their behavior. A predictor’s variance vanishes if its sensitivity to individual training samples does and the bias vanishes only if it is appropriately localized around the test feature. The transformer architecture used in current PFN implementations ensures only the former. These findings shall prove useful for designing architectures with favorable empirical behavior.