REVIEW 2 cited by
Post-Hoc Reversal: Are We Selecting Models Prematurely?
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
Post-Hoc Reversal: Are We Selecting Models Prematurely?
read the original abstract
Trained models are often composed with post-hoc transforms such as temperature scaling (TS), ensembling and stochastic weight averaging (SWA) to improve performance, robustness, uncertainty estimation, etc. However, such transforms are typically applied only after the base models have already been finalized by standard means. In this paper, we challenge this practice with an extensive empirical study. In particular, we demonstrate a phenomenon that we call post-hoc reversal, where performance trends are reversed after applying post-hoc transforms. This phenomenon is especially prominent in high-noise settings. For example, while base models overfit badly early in training, both ensembling and SWA favor base models trained for more epochs. Post-hoc reversal can also prevent the appearance of double descent and mitigate mismatches between test loss and test error seen in base models. Preliminary analyses suggest that these transforms induce reversal by suppressing the influence of mislabeled examples, exploiting differences in their learning dynamics from those of clean examples. Based on our findings, we propose post-hoc selection, a simple technique whereby post-hoc metrics inform model development decisions such as early stopping, checkpointing, and broader hyperparameter choices. Our experiments span real-world vision, language, tabular and graph datasets. On an LLM instruction tuning dataset, post-hoc selection results in >1.5x MMLU improvement compared to naive selection.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Are we Merging the Right Models? Impact of Expert Training Duration on Model Merging for LLMs
The optimal training duration for expert models before merging depends on the merging method; sparsification-based merging benefits from overtrained experts.
-
Are we Merging the Right Models? Impact of Expert Training Duration on Model Merging for LLMs
Sparsification-based model merging peaks well past expert validation optima, while averaging degrades with overtraining; duration and merge method must be chosen jointly.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.