How did you arrive at this research area?

Graph neural networks are prominent models for representation learning over graph-structured data. While the capabilities and limitations of these models are well-understood for simple graphs, our understanding remains incomplete in the context of knowledge graphs. Our goal is to provide a systematic understanding of the landscape of graph neural networks for knowledge graphs pertaining to the prominent task of link prediction. Our analysis entails a unifying perspective on seemingly unrelated models and unlocks a series of other models. The expressive power of various models is characterized via a corresponding relational Weisfeiler-Leman algorithm. This analysis is extended to provide a precise logical characterization of the class of functions captured by a class of graph neural networks. The theoretical findings presented in this paper explain the benefits of some widely employed practical design choices, which are validated empirically.

Transfer-based attacks are a practical method of black-box adversarial attacks, in which the attacker aims to craft adversarial examples from a source (surrogate) model that is transferable to the target model. A wide range of empirical works has tried to explain the transferability of adversarial examples from different angles. However, these works only provide ad hoc explanations without quantitative analyses. The theory behind transfer-based attacks remains a mystery.This paper studies transfer-based attacks under a unified theoretical framework. We propose an explanatory model, called the manifold attack model, that formalizes popular beliefs and explains the existing empirical results. Our model explains why adversarial examples are transferable even when the source model is inaccurate. Moreover, our model implies that the existence of transferable adversarial examples depends on the "curvature" of the data manifold, which quantitatively explains why the success rates of transfer-based attacks are hard to improve. We also discuss the expressive power and the possible extensions of our model in general applications.

Transformation invariances are present in many real-world problems. For example, image classification is usually invariant to rotation and color transformation: a rotated car in a different color is still identified as a car. Data augmentation, which adds the transformed data into the training set and trains a model on the augmented data, is one commonly used technique to build these invariances into the learning process. However, it is unclear how data augmentation performs theoretically and what the optimal algorithm is in presence of transformation invariances. In this paper, we study PAC learnability under transformation invariances in three settings according to different levels of realizability: (i) A hypothesis fits the augmented data; (ii) A hypothesis fits only the original data and the transformed data lying in the support of the data distribution; (iii) Agnostic case. One interesting observation is that distinguishing between the original data and the transformed data is necessary to achieve optimal accuracy in setting (ii) and (iii), which implies that any algorithm not differentiating between the original and transformed data (including data augmentation) is not optimal.

In this paper, we provide a theory of using graph neural networks (GNNs) for multi-node representation learning (where we are interested in learning a representation for a set of more than one node, such as link). We know that GNN is designed to learn single-node representations. When we want to learn a node set representation involving multiple nodes, a common practice in previous works is to directly aggregate the single-node representations obtained by a GNN into a joint node set representation. In this paper, we show a fundamental constraint of such an approach, namely the inability to capture the dependence between nodes in the node set, and argue that directly aggregating individual node representations does not lead to an effective joint representation for multiple nodes. Then, we notice that a few previous successful works for multi-node representation learning, including SEAL, Distance Encoding, and ID-GNN, all used node labeling.

We provide new statistical guarantees for transfer learning via representation learning--when transfer is achieved by learning a feature representation shared across different tasks. This enables learning on new tasks using far less data than is required to learn them in isolation. Formally, we consider $t+1$ tasks parameterized by functions of the form $f_j \circ h$ in a general function class $F \circ H$, where each $f_j$ is a task-specific function in $F$ and $h$ is the shared representation in $H$. Letting $C(\cdot)$ denote the complexity measure of the function class, we show that for diverse training tasks (1) the sample complexity needed to learn the shared representation across the first $t$ training tasks scales as $C(H) + t C(F)$, despite no explicit access to a signal from the feature representation and (2) with an accurate estimate of the representation, the sample complexity needed to learn a new task scales only with $C(F)$. Our results depend upon a new general notion of task diversity--applicable to models with general tasks, features, and losses--as well as a novel chain rule for Gaussian complexities.

We study a theory of reinforcement learning (RL) in which the learner receives binary feedback only once at the end of an episode. While this is an extreme test case for theory, it is also arguably more representative of real-world applications than the traditional requirement in RL practice that the learner receive feedback at every time step. Indeed, in many real-world applications of reinforcement learning, such as self-driving cars and robotics, it is easier to evaluate whether a learner's complete trajectory was either bad,'' but harder to provide a reward signal at each step. To show that learning is possible in this more challenging setting, we study the case where trajectory labels are generated by an unknown parametric model, and provide a statistically and computationally efficient algorithm that achieves sublinear regret.

While several papers have investigated computationally and statistically efficient methods for learning Gaussian mixtures, precise minimax bounds for their statistical performance as well as fundamental limits in high-dimensional settings are not well-understood. In this paper, we provide precise information theoretic bounds on the clustering accuracy and sample complexity of learning a mixture of two isotropic Gaussians in high dimensions under small mean separation. If there is a sparse subset of relevant dimensions that determine the mean separation, then the sample complexity only depends on the number of relevant dimensions and mean separation, and can be achieved by a simple computationally efficient procedure. Our results provide the first step of a theoretical basis for recent methods that combine feature selection and clustering.

In this paper, we study the problem of distributed mean estimation with 1-bit communication constraints. We propose a mean estimator that is based on (randomized and sequentially-chosen) interval queries, whose 1-bit outcome indicates whether the given sample lies in the specified interval. Our estimator is $(ε, δ)$-PAC for all distributions with bounded mean ($-λ\le \mathbb{E}(X) \le λ$) and variance ($\mathrm{Var}(X) \le σ^2$) for some known parameters $λ$ and $σ$. We derive a sample complexity bound $\widetilde{O}\big( \frac{σ^2}{ε^2}\log\frac{1}δ + \log\fracλσ\big)$, which matches the minimax lower bound for the unquantized setting up to logarithmic factors and the additional $\log\fracλσ$ term that we show to be unavoidable. We also establish an adaptivity gap for interval-query based estimators: the best non-adaptive mean estimator is considerably worse than our adaptive mean estimator for large $\fracλσ$. Finally, we give tightened sample complexity bounds for distributions with stronger tail decay, and present additional variants that (i) handle an unknown sampling budget (ii) adapt to the unknown true variance given (possibly loose) upper and lower bounds on the variance, and (iii) use only two stages of adaptivity at the expense of more complicated (non-interval) queries.