The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups -- e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.

Recent works have shown that learning from easier instances first can help deep neural networks (DNNs) generalize better. However, knowing which data to present during different stages of training is a challenging problem. In this work, we address this problem by introducing data parameters. More specifically, we equip each sample and class in a dataset with a learnable parameter (data parameters), which governs their importance in the learning process. During training, at each iteration, as we update the model parameters, we also update the data parameters. These updates are done by gradient descent and do not require hand-crafted rules or design. When applied to image classification task on CIFAR10, CIFAR100,WebVision and ImageNet datasets, and object detection task on KITTI dataset, learning a dynamic curriculum via data parameters leads to consistent gains, without any increase in model complexity or training time. When applied to a noisy dataset, the proposed method learns to learn from clean images and improves over the state-of-the-art methods by 14%. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first curriculum learning method to show gains on large scale image classification and detection tasks.

Bounding box (bbox) regression is a fundamental task in computer vision. So far, the most commonly used loss functions for bbox regression are the Intersection over Union (IoU) loss and its variants. In this paper, we generalize existing IoU-based losses to a new family of power IoU losses that have a power IoU term and an additional power regularization term with a single power parameter $\alpha$. We call this new family of losses the $\alpha$-IoU losses and analyze properties such as order preservingness and loss/gradient reweighting. Experiments on multiple object detection benchmarks and models demonstrate that $\alpha$-IoU losses, 1) can surpass existing IoU-based losses by a noticeable performance margin; 2) offer detectors more flexibility in achieving different levels of bbox regression accuracy by modulating $\alpha$; and 3) are more robust to small datasets and noisy bboxes.

We present a new family of information-theoretic generalization bounds, in which the training loss and the population loss are compared through a jointly convex function. This function is upper-bounded in terms of the disintegrated, samplewise, evaluated conditional mutual information (CMI), an information measure that depends on the losses incurred by the selected hypothesis, rather than on the hypothesis itself, as is common in probably approximately correct (PAC)-Bayesian results. We demonstrate the generality of this framework by recovering and extending previously known information-theoretic bounds. Furthermore, using the evaluated CMI, we derive a samplewise, average version of Seeger's PAC-Bayesian bound, where the convex function is the binary KL divergence. In some scenarios, this novel bound results in a tighter characterization of the population loss of deep neural networks than previous bounds. Finally, we derive high-probability versions of some of these average bounds. We demonstrate the unifying nature of the evaluated CMI bounds by using them to recover average and high-probability generalization bounds for multiclass classification with finite Natarajan dimension.

Virtually any model we use in machine learning to make predictions does not perfectly represent reality. So, most of the learning happens under model misspecification. In this work, we present a novel analysis of the generalization performance of Bayesian model averaging under model misspecification and i.i.d.

The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups -- e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.

This work proposes an optimization scheme for learning a curriculum over classes or training samples. The importance of each sample/class is reflected by a learnable parameter that is learned by gradient descent simultaneously with network weights. The proposed scheme particularly shows its advantage in noisy data as demonstrated empirically. All reviewers find their concerns well-addressed in authors' response, and they all find the paper a solid and interesting work.

Bounding box (bbox) regression is a fundamental task in computer vision. So far, the most commonly used loss functions for bbox regression are the Intersection over Union (IoU) loss and its variants. In this paper, we generalize existing IoU-based losses to a new family of power IoU losses that have a power IoU term and an additional power regularization term with a single power parameter \alpha . We call this new family of losses the \alpha -IoU losses and analyze properties such as order preservingness and loss/gradient reweighting. Experiments on multiple object detection benchmarks and models demonstrate that \alpha -IoU losses, 1) can surpass existing IoU-based losses by a noticeable performance margin; 2) offer detectors more flexibility in achieving different levels of bbox regression accuracy by modulating \alpha; and 3) are more robust to small datasets and noisy bboxes.

We present a new family of information-theoretic generalization bounds, in which the training loss and the population loss are compared through a jointly convex function. This function is upper-bounded in terms of the disintegrated, samplewise, evaluated conditional mutual information (CMI), an information measure that depends on the losses incurred by the selected hypothesis, rather than on the hypothesis itself, as is common in probably approximately correct (PAC)-Bayesian results. We demonstrate the generality of this framework by recovering and extending previously known information-theoretic bounds. Furthermore, using the evaluated CMI, we derive a samplewise, average version of Seeger's PAC-Bayesian bound, where the convex function is the binary KL divergence. In some scenarios, this novel bound results in a tighter characterization of the population loss of deep neural networks than previous bounds.

Recent works have shown that learning from easier instances first can help deep neural networks (DNNs) generalize better. However, knowing which data to present during different stages of training is a challenging problem. In this work, we address this problem by introducing data parameters. More specifically, we equip each sample and class in a dataset with a learnable parameter (data parameters), which governs their importance in the learning process. During training, at each iteration, as we update the model parameters, we also update the data parameters.