The unprecedented success of deep learning (DL) makes it unchallenged when it comes to classification problems. However, it is well established that the current DL methodology produces universally unstable neural networks (NNs). The instability problem has caused an enormous research effort -- with a vast literature on so-called adversarial attacks -- yet there has been no solution to the problem. Our paper addresses why there has been no solution to the problem, as we prove the following mathematical paradox: any training procedure based on training neural networks for classification problems with a fixed architecture will yield neural networks that are either inaccurate or unstable (if accurate) -- despite the provable existence of both accurate and stable neural networks for the same classification problems. The key is that the stable and accurate neural networks must have variable dimensions depending on the input, in particular, variable dimensions is a necessary condition for stability. Our result points towards the paradox that accurate and stable neural networks exist, however, modern algorithms do not compute them. This yields the question: if the existence of neural networks with desirable properties can be proven, can one also find algorithms that compute them? There are cases in mathematics where provable existence implies computability, but will this be the case for neural networks? The contrary is true, as we demonstrate how neural networks can provably exist as approximate minimisers to standard optimisation problems with standard cost functions, however, no randomised algorithm can compute them with probability better than 1/2.
翻译:深层次学习的空前成功( DL) 使得在分类问题方面没有质疑。 但是,人们公认,目前的 DL 方法产生了普遍不稳定的神经网络。 不稳定问题已经引发了巨大的研究努力 -- -- 有大量关于所谓的对抗性攻击的文献,但这一问题还没有解决。 我们的文件说明了为什么没有解决这个问题,因为我们证明存在以下数学悖论:任何基于神经网络的培训程序,以对固定建筑进行分类的问题,都会产生不准确或不稳定的神经网络(如果准确的话) -- -- 尽管精确和稳定的神经网络存在,但同样分类问题也是可以确定的。 关键在于稳定和准确的神经网络必须具有不同层面,取决于投入,特别是,不同层面是稳定性的必要条件。我们的结果表明,准确和稳定的神经网络存在,然而,现代的算法并不能够对它们进行校正。 这就引出了这样一个问题:如果具有适当特性的神经网络的存在能够被证明是准确的,那么,人们能否找到更精确的神经网络的算法,但也无法找到更精确的精确性? 在数学中,有这样的情况是真实的精确性: 我们的数学中会显示的是,这种精确性网络是真实的。