REVIEW 2 cited by
Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tail
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
Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tail
read the original abstract
State-of-the-art results on image recognition tasks are achieved using over-parameterized learning algorithms that (nearly) perfectly fit the training set and are known to fit well even random labels. This tendency to memorize the labels of the training data is not explained by existing theoretical analyses. Memorization of the training data also presents significant privacy risks when the training data contains sensitive personal information and thus it is important to understand whether such memorization is necessary for accurate learning. We provide the first conceptual explanation and a theoretical model for this phenomenon. Specifically, we demonstrate that for natural data distributions memorization of labels is necessary for achieving close-to-optimal generalization error. Crucially, even labels of outliers and noisy labels need to be memorized. The model is motivated and supported by the results of several recent empirical works. In our model, data is sampled from a mixture of subpopulations and our results show that memorization is necessary whenever the distribution of subpopulation frequencies is long-tailed. Image and text data is known to be long-tailed and therefore our results establish a formal link between these empirical phenomena. Our results allow to quantify the cost of limiting memorization in learning and explain the disparate effects that privacy and model compression have on different subgroups.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
When unlearning is free: leveraging low influence points to reduce computational costs
Low-influence training points can be dropped from forget/retain sets before unlearning, cutting runtime up to ~50% with little measured loss in accuracy or MIA-based privacy.
-
PaLM 2 Technical Report
PaLM 2 reports state-of-the-art results on language, reasoning, and multilingual tasks with improved efficiency over PaLM.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.