Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

On Uniform, Bayesian, and PAC-Bayesian Deep Ensembles

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 2406.05469 v2 pith:PJNOPDNH submitted 2024-06-08 cs.LG

On Uniform, Bayesian, and PAC-Bayesian Deep Ensembles

classification cs.LG
keywords ensemblesdeepensemblegeneralizationmodelsbayesperformanceerrors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

It is common practice to combine deep neural networks into ensembles. These deep ensembles can benefit from the cancellation of errors effect: Errors by ensemble members may average out, leading to better generalization performance than each individual network. Bayesian neural networks learn a posterior distribution over model parameters, and sampling and weighting networks according to this posterior yields an ensemble model referred to as a Bayes ensemble. This study reviews the argument that neither the sampling nor the weighting in Bayes ensembles are particularly well suited for increasing generalization performance, as they do not support the cancellation of errors effect. In contrast, we show that a weighted average of models, where the weights are optimized by minimizing a second-order PAC-Bayesian generalization bound, can improve generalization. It is crucial that the optimization takes correlations between models into account. This can be achieved by minimizing the tandem loss, which requires hold-out data for estimating error correlations. The tandem loss based PAC-Bayesian weighting increases robustness against correlated models and models with lower performance in an ensemble. This allows us to safely add several models from the same learning process to an ensemble, instead of using early-stopping for selecting a single weight configuration. Our experiments provide further evidence that state-of-the-art intricate Bayes ensembles do not outperform simple uniformly weighted deep ensembles in terms of classification accuracy. Additionally, we show that these Bayes ensembles cannot match the performance of deep ensembles weighted by optimizing the tandem loss, which additionally provides nonvacuous rigorous generalization guarantees.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Concentration and Calibration in Predictive Bayesian Inference

    stat.ME 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Predictive Bayesian inference posteriors concentrate onto a forward-model-dependent quantity and produce miscalibrated credible sets unless the predictive model contains the true data-generating process.

  2. Predictively Oriented Posteriors

    stat.ME 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0

    A new posterior family scores the posterior predictive directly, giving slower concentration but better predictive performance under model misspecification.