Advances in machine learning have enabled the prediction of immune system responses to prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines. However, the engineering task of designing vaccines remains a challenge. In particular, the genetic variability of the human immune system makes it difficult to design peptide vaccines that provide widespread immunity in vaccinated populations. We introduce a framework for evaluating and designing peptide vaccines that uses probabilistic machine learning models, and demonstrate its ability to produce designs for a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine that outperform previous designs. We provide a theoretical analysis of the approximability, scalability, and complexity of our framework.

Neural network pruning is a popular technique used to reduce the inference costs of modern, potentially overparameterized, networks. Starting from a pre-trained network, the process is as follows: remove redundant parameters, retrain, and repeat while maintaining the same test accuracy. The result is a model that is a fraction of the size of the original with comparable predictive performance (test accuracy). Here, we reassess and evaluate whether the use of test accuracy alone in the terminating condition is sufficient to ensure that the resulting model performs well across a wide spectrum of "harder" metrics such as generalization to out-of-distribution data and resilience to noise. Across evaluations on varying architectures and data sets, we find that pruned networks effectively approximate the unpruned model, however, the prune ratio at which pruned networks achieve commensurate performance varies significantly across tasks. These results call into question the extent of \emph{genuine} overparameterization in deep learning and raise concerns about the practicability of deploying pruned networks, specifically in the context of safety-critical systems, unless they are widely evaluated beyond test accuracy to reliably predict their performance. Our code is available at https://github.com/lucaslie/torchprune.

The inaccuracy of neural network models on inputs that do not stem from the training data distribution is both problematic and at times unrecognized. Model uncertainty estimation can address this issue, where uncertainty estimates are often based on the variation in predictions produced by a diverse ensemble of models applied to the same input. Here we describe Maximize Overall Diversity (MOD), a straightforward approach to improve ensemble-based uncertainty estimates by encouraging larger overall diversity in ensemble predictions across all possible inputs that might be encountered in the future. When applied to various neural network ensembles, MOD significantly improves predictive performance for out-of-distribution test examples without sacrificing in-distribution performance on 38 Protein-DNA binding regression datasets, 9 UCI datasets, and the IMDB-Wiki image dataset. Across many Bayesian optimization tasks, the performance of UCB acquisition is also greatly improved by leveraging MOD uncertainty estimates.

Local explanation frameworks aim to rationalize particular decisions made by a black-box prediction model. Existing techniques are often restricted to a specific type of predictor or based on input saliency, which may be undesirably sensitive to factors unrelated to the model's decision making process. We instead propose sufficient input subsets that identify minimal subsets of features whose observed values alone suffice for the same decision to be reached, even if all other input feature values are missing. General principles that globally govern a model's decision-making can also be revealed by searching for clusters of such input patterns across many data points. Our approach is conceptually straightforward, entirely model-agnostic, simply implemented using instance-wise backward selection, and able to produce more concise rationales than existing techniques. We demonstrate the utility of our interpretation method on various neural network models trained on text, image, and genomic data.