On the Complexity of Learning from Label Proportions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the problem of learning with label proportions, which we call LLP learning, the training data is unlabeled, and only the proportions of examples receiving each label are given. The goal is to learn a hypothesis that predicts the proportions of labels on the distribution underlying the sample. This model of learning is applicable to a wide variety of settings, including predicting the number of votes for candidates in political elections from polls. In this paper, we formally define this class and resolve foundational questions regarding the computational complexity of LLP and characterize its relationship to PAC learning. Among our results, we show, perhaps surprisingly, that for finite VC classes what can be efficiently LLP learned is a strict subset of what can be leaned efficiently in PAC, under standard complexity assumptions. We also show that there exist classes of functions whose learnability in LLP is independent of ZFC, the standard set theoretic axioms. This implies that LLP learning cannot be easily characterized (like PAC by VC dimension).
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024Learning from Aggregate responses: Instance Level versus Bag Level Loss Functionscited by 2
- 2023Learning under Label Proportions for Text Classificationcited by 1
- 2023AI and Core Electoral Processes: Mapping the Horizonscited by 0
- 2026Learning Conditional Averagescited by 0
- 2026Learning Conditional Averages12 Feb 2026
- 2024Learning from Aggregate responses: Instance Level versus Bag Level Loss Functions20 Jan 2024
- 2023Learning under Label Proportions for Text Classification18 Oct 2023
- 2023AI and Core Electoral Processes: Mapping the Horizons7 Feb 2023