Understanding the bias-variance tradeoff of Bregman divergences
read the original abstract
This paper builds upon the work of Pfau (2013), which generalized the bias variance tradeoff to any Bregman divergence loss function. Pfau (2013) showed that for Bregman divergences, the bias and variances are defined with respect to a central label, defined as the mean of the label variable, and a central prediction, of a more complex form. We show that, similarly to the label, the central prediction can be interpreted as the mean of a random variable, where the mean operates in a dual space defined by the loss function itself. Viewing the bias-variance tradeoff through operations taken in dual space, we subsequently derive several results of interest. In particular, (a) the variance terms satisfy a generalized law of total variance; (b) if a source of randomness cannot be controlled, its contribution to the bias and variance has a closed form; (c) there exist natural ensembling operations in the label and prediction spaces which reduce the variance and do not affect the bias.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Calibeating for general proper losses: A Bregman divergence approach
A Bregman divergence approach yields a unified calibeating framework for general proper losses, delivering U-calibration and logarithmic regret for Tsallis losses with weaker dimension dependence than prior work.
-
Calibeating for general proper losses: A Bregman divergence approach
A Bregman divergence approach yields a general calibeating framework that achieves U-calibration with logarithmic regret for Tsallis losses and a new regret equality for Be The Regularized Leader.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.