We provide novel theoretical insights on structured prediction in the context of efficient convex surrogate loss minimization with consistency guarantees. For any task loss, we construct a convex surrogate that can be optimized via stochastic gradient descent and we prove tight bounds on the so-called "calibration function" relating the excess surrogate risk to the actual risk. In contrast to prior related work, we carefully monitor the effect of the exponential number of classes in the learning guarantees as well as on the optimization complexity. As an interesting consequence, we formalize the intuition that some task losses make learning harder than others, and that the classical 0-1 loss is ill-suited for general structured prediction.
The task of ranking has attracted a lot of attention and @cite_9 @cite_10 @cite_2 @cite_0 analyze different families of surrogate and task losses proving their (in-)consistency. In this line of work, propose a quadratic surrogate for an arbitrary low rank loss which is related to our quadratic surrogate . They also prove that several important ranking losses, i.e., precision@q, expected rank utility, mean average precision and pairwise disagreement, are of low-rank. We conjecture that our approach is compatible with these losses and leave precise connections as future work.
@cite_0 @cite_9 @cite_10 @cite_2
2114028889 2167247347 2212774062 1982032418
We present a theoretical analysis of supervised ranking, providing necessary and sufficient conditions for the asymptotic consistency of algorithms based on minimizing a surrogate loss function. We show that many commonly used surrogate losses are inconsistent; surprisingly, we show inconsistency even in low-noise settings. We present a new value-regularized linear loss, establish its consistency under reasonable assumptions on noise, and show that it outperforms conventional ranking losses in a collaborative filtering experiment. We study surrogate losses for learning to rank, in a framework where the rankings are induced by scores and the task is to learn the scoring function. We focus on the calibration of surrogate losses with respect to a ranking evaluation metric, where the calibration is equivalent to the guarantee that near-optimal values of the surrogate risk imply near-optimal values of the risk defined by the evaluation metric. We prove that if a surrogate loss is a convex function of the scores, then it is not calibrated with respect to two evaluation metrics widely used for search engine evaluation, namely the Average Precision and the Expected Reciprocal Rank. We also show that such convex surrogate losses cannot be calibrated with respect to the Pairwise Disagreement, an evaluation metric used when learning from pair-wise preferences. Our results cast lights on the intrinsic difficulty of some ranking problems, as well as on the limitations of learning-to-rank algorithms based on the minimization of a convex surrogate risk. We address the problem of designing surrogate losses for learning scoring functions in the context of label ranking. We extend to ranking problems a notion of order-preserving losses previously introduced for multiclass classification, and show that these losses lead to consistent formulations with respect to a family of ranking evaluation metrics. An order-preserving loss can be tailored for a given evaluation metric by appropriately setting some weights depending on this metric and the observed supervision. These weights, called the standard form of the supervision, do not always exist, but we show that previous consistency results for ranking were proved in special cases where they do. We then evaluate a new pairwise loss consistent with the (Normalized) Discounted Cumulative Gain on benchmark datasets. Many of the classification algorithms developed in the machine learning literature, including the support vector machine and boosting, can be viewed as minimum contrast methods that minimize a convex surrogate of the 0–1 loss function. The convexity makes these algorithms computationally efficient. The use of a surrogate, however, has statistical consequences that must be balanced against the computational virtues of convexity. To study these issues, we provide a general quantitative relationship between the risk as assessed using the 0–1 loss and the risk as assessed using any nonnegative surrogate loss function. We show that this relationship gives nontrivial upper bounds on excess risk under the weakest possible condition on the loss function—that it satisfies a pointwise form of Fisher consistency for classification. The relationship is based on a simple variational transformation of the loss function that is easy to compute in many applications. We also present a refined version of this result in the...