mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Loss as the Inconsistency of a Probabilistic Dependency Graph: Choose Your Model, Not Your Loss Function

arXiv 2202.11862 ↗First posted 24 Feb 2022cs.LG cs.AI cs.ITcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In a world blessed with a great diversity of loss functions, we argue that that choice between them is not a matter of taste or pragmatics, but of model. Probabilistic depencency graphs (PDGs) are probabilistic models that come equipped with a measure of "inconsistency". We prove that many standard loss functions arise as the inconsistency of a natural PDG describing the appropriate scenario, and use the same approach to justify a well-known connection between regularizers and priors. We also show that the PDG inconsistency captures a large class of statistical divergences, and detail benefits of thinking of them in this way, including an intuitive visual language for deriving inequalities between them. In variational inference, we find that the ELBO, a somewhat opaque objective for latent variable models, and variants of it arise for free out of uncontroversial modeling assumptions -- as do simple graphical proofs of their corresponding bounds. Finally, we observe that inconsistency becomes the log partition function (free energy) in the setting where PDGs are factor graphs.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2022.

Builds on

4 of 26 references.

References · 4

  1. 2013Auto-Encoding Variational Bayescited by 3,980
  2. 2016Variational Inference: A Review for Statisticianscited by 1,466
  3. 2020A survey of loss functions for semantic segmentationcited by 216
  4. 2020Probabilistic Dependency Graphscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

6 papers.