Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

On the Power of Interactive Proofs for Learning (2404.08158v1)

Published 11 Apr 2024 in cs.CC, cs.DS, and cs.LG

Abstract: We continue the study of doubly-efficient proof systems for verifying agnostic PAC learning, for which we obtain the following results. - We construct an interactive protocol for learning the $t$ largest Fourier characters of a given function $f \colon {0,1}n \to {0,1}$ up to an arbitrarily small error, wherein the verifier uses $\mathsf{poly}(t)$ random examples. This improves upon the Interactive Goldreich-Levin protocol of Goldwasser, Rothblum, Shafer, and Yehudayoff (ITCS 2021) whose sample complexity is $\mathsf{poly}(t,n)$. - For agnostically learning the class $\mathsf{AC}0[2]$ under the uniform distribution, we build on the work of Carmosino, Impagliazzo, Kabanets, and Kolokolova (APPROX/RANDOM 2017) and design an interactive protocol, where given a function $f \colon {0,1}n \to {0,1}$, the verifier learns the closest hypothesis up to $\mathsf{polylog}(n)$ multiplicative factor, using quasi-polynomially many random examples. In contrast, this class has been notoriously resistant even for constructing realisable learners (without a prover) using random examples. - For agnostically learning $k$-juntas under the uniform distribution, we obtain an interactive protocol, where the verifier uses $O(2k)$ random examples to a given function $f \colon {0,1}n \to {0,1}$. Crucially, the sample complexity of the verifier is independent of $n$. We also show that if we do not insist on doubly-efficient proof systems, then the model becomes trivial. Specifically, we show a protocol for an arbitrary class $\mathcal{C}$ of Boolean functions in the distribution-free setting, where the verifier uses $O(1)$ labeled examples to learn $f$.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (34)
  1. Computational complexity: a modern approach. Cambridge University Press, 2009.
  2. Proofs of proximity for distribution testing. In Anna R. Karlin, editor, 9th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2018, January 11-14, 2018, Cambridge, MA, USA, volume 94 of LIPIcs, pages 53:1–53:14. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2018.
  3. Classical verification of quantum learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04843, 2023.
  4. Learning algorithms from natural proofs. In 31st Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2016). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2016.
  5. Agnostic learning from tolerant natural proofs. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2017). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2017.
  6. Covert learning: How to learn with an untrusted intermediary. In Theory of Cryptography: 19th International Conference, TCC 2021, Raleigh, NC, USA, November 8–11, 2021, Proceedings, Part III 19, pages 1–31. Springer, 2021.
  7. Testing and learning quantum juntas nearly optimally. In Proceedings of the 2023 Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 1163–1185. SIAM, 2023.
  8. Junta correlation is testable. In David Zuckerman, editor, Proceedings pf the 60th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 19, pages 1549–1563, 2019.
  9. Vitaly Feldman. On the power of membership queries in agnostic learning. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10:163–182, 2009.
  10. How to construct random functions. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 33(4):792–807, 1986.
  11. Improved learning from kolmogorov complexity. In 38th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2023). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023.
  12. Delegating computation: Interactive proofs for muggles. J. ACM, 62(4):1–64, 2015.
  13. O. Goldreich and L. A. Levin. A hard-core predicate for all one-way functions. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’89, page 25–32, New York, NY, USA, 1989. Association for Computing Machinery.
  14. Testing fourier dimensionality and sparsity. SIAM Journal on Computing, 40(4):1075–1100, 2011.
  15. Sample-based proofs of proximity. In 13th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2022). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022.
  16. Interactive proofs for verifying machine learning. In 12th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2021, January 6-8, 2021, Virtual Conference, 2021.
  17. Verifying the unseen: interactive proofs for label-invariant distribution properties. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1208–1219, 2022.
  18. Agnostic pac learning of k𝑘kitalic_k-juntas using l⁢_⁢2𝑙_2l\_2italic_l _ 2-polynomial regression. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 2922–2938. PMLR, 2023.
  19. Uniform direct product theorems: Simplified, optimized, and derandomized. SIAM J. Comput., 39(4):1637–1665, 2010.
  20. Randomness vs time: Derandomization under a uniform assumption. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 63(4):672–688, 2001.
  21. Learning decision trees using the Fourier spectrum. SIAM J. Comput., 22(6):1331–1348, 1993.
  22. An introduction to computational learning theory. MIT press, 1994.
  23. Constant depth circuits, fourier transform, and learnability. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 40(3):607–620, 1993.
  24. Learning juntas. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 03, page 206–212, 2003.
  25. Pac verification of statistical algorithms. In The Thirty Sixth Annual Conference on Learning Theory, pages 5021–5043. PMLR, 2023.
  26. Hardness vs randomness. Journal of computer and System Sciences, 49(2):149–167, 1994.
  27. Ryan O’Donnell. Analysis of boolean functions. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
  28. Tolerant property testing and distance approximation. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 72(6):1012–1042, 2006.
  29. Alexander A. Razborov. Lower bounds on the size of constant-depth networks over a complete basis with logical addition. Mathematicheskie Zametki, 41(4):598–607, 1987.
  30. Natural proofs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 55(1):24–35, 1997.
  31. Interactive proofs of proximity: delegating computation in sublinear time. In Dan Boneh, Tim Roughgarden, and Joan Feigenbaum, editors, Symposium on Theory of Computing Conference, STOC’13, Palo Alto, CA, USA, June 1-4, 2013, pages 793–802. ACM, 2013.
  32. Roman Smolensky. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for Boolean circuit complexity. In Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 77–82, 1987.
  33. Understanding machine learning: From theory to algorithms. Cambridge university press, 2014.
  34. Leslie G. Valiant. A theory of the learnable. Commun. ACM, 27(11):1134–1142, 1984.
Citations (3)

Summary

  • The paper introduces interactive proofs that significantly reduce sample complexity for verifying agnostic PAC learning of diverse Boolean function classes.
  • It details a novel protocol for efficiently identifying heavy Fourier characters, offering doubly-efficient performance over previous methods.
  • The framework extends verification to AC0[2] circuits and k-juntas, paving the way for robust learning techniques in computationally complex settings.

Interactive Proofs for Verifying Agnostic PAC Learning of Boolean Functions

Overview

The paper of interactive proof (IP) systems for verifying the results of computational tasks has profoundly impacted theoretical computer science. Rooted in this tradition, a paper extends the exploration of IPs into the field of agnostic Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) learning of Boolean functions. This work particularly addresses verifying the learning of significant classes such as large Fourier coefficients, AC0[2]AC^0[2], kk-juntas, and general circuit classes, showcasing the power of interactive proofs in a PAC learning context.

Learning Heavy Fourier Characters

Fourier analysis is a powerful tool in understanding Boolean function complexity. Identifying heavy Fourier coefficients (characters) plays a critical role in algorithms across learning theory, coding, and cryptography. The paper introduces a doubly-efficient interactive protocol for finding the tt heaviest Fourier characters of a Boolean function f:{0,1}n{0,1}f: \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}. The protocol requires poly(t/)poly(t/) random examples, a quantitative improvement over previous works, lending a sample-efficient methodology for learning heavy Fourier characters.

Verifying Learning AC0[2]AC^0[2] Circuits

AC0[2]AC^0[2] represents a class of constant-depth polynomial-size circuits including AND, OR, NOT, and XOR gates. The paper builds an agnostic PAC-verifier for AC0[2]AC^0[2], projecting a scenario where collision-resistant hashing can be bypassed in accessing the closest hypothesis in a PAC-verification model. Through an interactive protocol, it demonstrates that a quasi-polynomial number of random examples sufficiently estimate the distance between a given function and its closest hypothesis in AC0[2]AC^0[2], culminating in a doubly efficient learning framework.

Agnostic Verification for kk-Juntas

kk-juntas, functions depending on at most kk of their input bits, have posed significant challenges in the field of learning theory. The paper presents an interactive protocol for verifying the learning of kk-juntas under the uniform distribution using O(2k)O(2^k) random examples, independent of nn. This efficiency promotes a practical approach towards learning kk-juntas, contributing to understanding their complex nature.

Traditional Learning Transformed

The paper illustrates that constructing a novel interactive protocol allows for learning arbitrary classes of Boolean functions with trivial sample complexity in the distribution-free setting. By delegating the learning task to an unbounded prover, it achieves distribution-free learning of P/polyP/poly with O(1/)O(1/) labeled examples—a breakthrough that simplifies the learning process for any class of Boolean functions.

Implications and Future Directions

This paper's implications are vast, introducing a framework that could redefine agnostic PAC learning through interactive proofs. Beyond the academic curiosity, it paves the way for practical verification systems in machine learning, where computational resources and data access are limited. Speculating on future developments, one could foresee the evolution of more sophisticated protocols for broader classes and the exploration of IP models in other learning paradigms.

Conclusion

Interactive proofs for learning represent a frontier in the overlap of computational complexity, machine learning, and cryptography. This paper leverages the structural properties of Boolean functions to efficiently verify agnostic PAC learning tasks, marking significant progress in the theory and possibly the practice of machine learning.