However, we agree that the usage of this term might be ambiguous.

We provide additional architectural details here beyond those provided in the paper. This provides enough layers to permit message passing along each path through a program's loop structures twice, but not enough layers for the IPA-GNN to learn to follow the ground truth trace of most programs. In all models, the output layer consists of the computation of logits, followed by a softmax crossentropy categorical loss term. This loss is then optimized using a differentiable optimizer during training. For the learning to execute full and partial programs tasks, we generate a dataset from a probabilistic grammar over programs.

Graph neural networks (GNNs) have emerged as a powerful tool for learning software engineering tasks including code completion, bug finding, and program repair. They benefit from leveraging program structure like control flow graphs, but they are not well-suited to tasks like program execution that require far more sequential reasoning steps than number of GNN propagation steps. Recurrent neural networks (RNNs), on the other hand, are well-suited to long sequential chains of reasoning, but they do not naturally incorporate program structure and generally perform worse on the above tasks. Our aim is to achieve the best of both worlds, and we do so by introducing a novel GNN architecture, the Instruction Pointer Attention Graph Neural Network (IPA-GNN), which achieves improved systematic generalization on the task of learning to execute programs using control flow graphs. The model arises by considering RNNs operating on program traces with branch decisions as latent variables. The IPA-GNN can be seen either as a continuous relaxation of the RNN model or as a GNN variant more tailored to execution. To test the models, we propose evaluating systematic generalization on learning to execute using control flow graphs, which tests sequential reasoning and use of program structure. More practically, we evaluate these models on the task of learning to execute partial programs, as might arise if using the model as a heuristic function in program synthesis. Results show that the IPA-GNN outperforms a variety of RNN and GNN baselines on both tasks.

In this section, we describe the details of the network architectures used in Sec. 4 and 5. We mainly used 4 GPUs (NVIDIA V100; 16GB) for the experiments in Sec. 4 and 5 and it took about 4 hours per seed (in the case of 3M steps). Actually, we conducted exhaustive evaluations through the enormous experiments, and we hope our empirical observations and recommendations help the practitioners to explore the explosive configuration space. Learning rate (policy) 1e-4 5e-5 3e-4 3e-4 Learning rate (value) 1e-4 1e-2 3e-4 3e-4 Weight initialization Uniform Xavier Uniform Xavier Uniform Xavier Uniform Initial output scale (policy) 1.0 1e-4 1e-2 1e-2 Target update Hard - Soft (5e-3) Soft (5e-3) Clipped Double Q False - True True Table 7: Details of each network architecture. We refer the original implementations of each algorithm which is available online [23, 14, 48, 27, 42].

Recently many algorithms were devised for reinforcement learning (RL) with function approximation. While they have clear algorithmic distinctions, they also have many implementation differences that are algorithm-independent and sometimes under-emphasized. Such mixing of algorithmic novelty and implementation craftsmanship makes rigorous analyses of the sources of performance improvements across algorithms difficult. In this work, we focus on a series of off-policy inference-based actor-critic algorithms - MPO, AWR, and SAC - to decouple their algorithmic innovations and implementation decisions. We present unified derivations through a single control-as-inference objective, where we can categorize each algorithm as based on either Expectation-Maximization (EM) or direct Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence minimization and treat the rest of specifications as implementation details. We performed extensive ablation studies, and identified substantial performance drops whenever implementation details are mismatched for algorithmic choices. These results show which implementation or code details are co-adapted and co-evolved with algorithms, and which are transferable across algorithms: as examples, we identified that tanh Gaussian policy and network sizes are highly adapted to algorithmic types, while layer normalization and ELU are critical for MPO's performances but also transfer to noticeable gains in SAC. We hope our work can inspire future work to further demystify sources of performance improvements across multiple algorithms and allow researchers to build on one another's both algorithmic and implementational innovations.

Learning equivariant representations is a promising way to reduce sample and model complexity and improve the generalization performance of deep neural networks. The spherical CNNs are successful examples, producing SO(3)-equivariant representations of spherical inputs. There are two main types of spherical CNNs. The first type lifts the inputs to functions on the rotation group SO(3) and applies convolutions on the group, which are computationally expensive since SO(3) has one extra dimension. The second type applies convolutions directly on the sphere, which are limited to zonal (isotropic) filters, and thus have limited expressivity.

A good teacher can adjust a curriculum based on students' learning history. By analogy, in this paper, we study the dynamics of a deep neural network's (DNN) performance on individual samples during its learning process. The observed properties allow us to develop an adaptive curriculum that leads to faster learning of more accurate models. We introduce dynamic instance hardness (DIH), the exponential moving average of a sample's instantaneous hardness (e.g., a loss, or a change in output) over the training history. A low DIH indicates that a model retains knowledge about a sample over time.

Adversarial robustness is an increasingly critical property of classifiers in applications. The design of robust algorithms relies on surrogate losses since the optimization of the adversarial loss with most hypothesis sets is NP-hard. But, which surrogate losses should be used and when do they benefit from theoretical guarantees? We present an extensive study of this question, including a detailed analysis of the H-calibration and H-consistency of adversarial surrogate losses. We show that convex loss functions, or the supremum-based convex losses often used in applications, are not H-calibrated for common hypothesis sets used in machine learning.

Adversarial robustness is an increasingly critical property of classifiers in applications. The design of robust algorithms relies on surrogate losses since the optimization of the adversarial loss with most hypothesis sets is NP-hard. But, which surrogate losses should be used and when do they benefit from theoretical guarantees? We present an extensive study of this question, including a detailed analysis of the H-calibration and H-consistency of adversarial surrogate losses. We show that convex loss functions, or the supremum-based convex losses often used in applications, are not H-calibrated for common hypothesis sets used in machine learning.

Inverse halftoning is a technique used to recover realistic images from ancient prints (e.g., photographs, newspapers, books). The rise of deep learning has led to the gradual incorporation of neural network designs into inverse halftoning methods. Most of existing inverse halftoning approaches adopt the U-net architecture, which uses an encoder to encode halftone prints, followed by a decoder for image reconstruction. However, the mainstream supervised learning paradigm with element-wise regression commonly adopted in U-net based methods has poor generalization ability in practical applications. Specifically, when there is a large gap between the dithering patterns of the training and testing halftones, the reconstructed continuous-tone images have obvious artifacts.