REVIEW 1 cited by
The Limits of Post-Selection Generalization
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
The Limits of Post-Selection Generalization
read the original abstract
While statistics and machine learning offers numerous methods for ensuring generalization, these methods often fail in the presence of adaptivity---the common practice in which the choice of analysis depends on previous interactions with the same dataset. A recent line of work has introduced powerful, general purpose algorithms that ensure post hoc generalization (also called robust or post-selection generalization), which says that, given the output of the algorithm, it is hard to find any statistic for which the data differs significantly from the population it came from. In this work we show several limitations on the power of algorithms satisfying post hoc generalization. First, we show a tight lower bound on the error of any algorithm that satisfies post hoc generalization and answers adaptively chosen statistical queries, showing a strong barrier to progress in post selection data analysis. Second, we show that post hoc generalization is not closed under composition, despite many examples of such algorithms exhibiting strong composition properties.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Online Shadow Tomography Matching the Classical Bounds
Online shadow tomography can be solved with O(log m sqrt(log d)/eps^3) or O(sqrt(m)/eps^2) copies, matching known classical rates, but the first bound's key proof lemma contains an invalid inequality.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.