Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Benign Overfitting of Constant-Stepsize SGD for Linear Regression

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2103.12692 v3 pith:G2K4NBF2 submitted 2021-03-23 cs.LG math.OCstat.ML

classification cs.LGmath.OCstat.ML
keywords boundaveragingiteratedataexcessoverfittingregressionrisk
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

There is an increasing realization that algorithmic inductive biases are central in preventing overfitting; empirically, we often see a benign overfitting phenomenon in overparameterized settings for natural learning algorithms, such as stochastic gradient descent (SGD), where little to no explicit regularization has been employed. This work considers this issue in arguably the most basic setting: constant-stepsize SGD (with iterate averaging or tail averaging) for linear regression in the overparameterized regime. Our main result provides a sharp excess risk bound, stated in terms of the full eigenspectrum of the data covariance matrix, that reveals a bias-variance decomposition characterizing when generalization is possible: (i) the variance bound is characterized in terms of an effective dimension (specific for SGD) and (ii) the bias bound provides a sharp geometric characterization in terms of the location of the initial iterate (and how it aligns with the data covariance matrix). More specifically, for SGD with iterate averaging, we demonstrate the sharpness of the established excess risk bound by proving a matching lower bound (up to constant factors). For SGD with tail averaging, we show its advantage over SGD with iterate averaging by proving a better excess risk bound together with a nearly matching lower bound. Moreover, we reflect on a number of notable differences between the algorithmic regularization afforded by (unregularized) SGD in comparison to ordinary least squares (minimum-norm interpolation) and ridge regression. Experimental results on synthetic data corroborate our theoretical findings.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools