Machine learning methods can be unreliable when deployed in domains that differ from the domains on which they were trained. There are a wide range of proposals for mitigating this problem by learning representations that are ``invariant'' in some sense.However, these methods generally contradict each other, and none of them consistently improve performance on real-world domain shift benchmarks. There are two main questions that must be addressed to understand when, if ever, we should use each method. First, how does each ad hoc notion of ``invariance'' relate to the structure of real-world problems? And, second, when does learning invariant representations actually yield robust models? To address these issues, we introduce a broad formal notion of what it means for a real-world domain shift to admit invariant structure. Then, we characterize the causal structures that are compatible with this notion of invariance.With this in hand, we find conditions under which method-specific invariance notions correspond to real-world invariant structure, and we clarify the relationship between invariant structure and robustness to domain shifts. For both questions, we find that the true underlying causal structure of the data plays a critical role.
翻译:当机器学习方法被部署在不同于他们所培训的领域的领域时,它们可能不可靠。 有很多关于通过学习“ 变化” 的表达方式来缓解这一问题的建议。 但是,这些方法通常相互矛盾, 没有一个方法在现实世界域变化基准上不断提高绩效。 需要解决两个主要问题才能理解何时, 如果曾经, 我们应该使用每种方法。 首先, “ 变化” 的每个特定概念如何与现实世界问题的结构相联系? 其次, 当学习不变化的表达方式实际上产生强有力的模型时? 为了解决这些问题, 我们引入了一个广义的正式概念, 它意味着真实世界域向接纳不变化结构转变的含义。 然后, 我们描述与这种变化概念相容的因果关系结构。 手头, 我们找到方法特有的差异概念与现实世界变化结构相对应的条件, 我们澄清了差异结构与域变化的稳健关系。 对于这两个问题, 我们发现数据的真正根本的因果关系结构具有关键的作用。