Tighter PAC-Bayes Bounds Through Coin-Betting
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We consider the problem of estimating the mean of a sequence of random elements f(X1, θ) , ldots, f(Xn, θ) where f is a fixed scalar function, S=(X1, ldots, Xn) are independent random variables, and θ is a possibly S-dependent parameter. An example of such a problem would be to estimate the generalization error of a neural network trained on n examples where f is a loss function. Classically, this problem is approached through concentration inequalities holding uniformly over compact parameter sets of functions f, for example as in Rademacher or VC type analysis. However, in many problems, such inequalities often yield numerically vacuous estimates. Recently, the PAC-Bayes framework has been proposed as a better alternative for this class of problems for its ability to often give numerically non-vacuous bounds. In this paper, we show that we can do even better: we show how to refine the proof strategy of the PAC-Bayes bounds and achieve even tighter guarantees. Our approach is based on the coin-betting framework that derives the numerically tightest known time-uniform concentration inequalities from the regret guarantees of online gambling algorithms. In particular, we derive the first PAC-Bayes concentration inequality based on the coin-betting approach that holds simultaneously for all sample sizes. We demonstrate its tightness showing that by relaxing it we obtain a number of previous results in a closed form including Bernoulli-KL and empirical Bernstein inequalities. Finally, we propose an efficient algorithm to numerically calculate confidence sequences from our bound, which often generates nonvacuous confidence bounds even with one sample, unlike the state-of-the-art PAC-Bayes bounds.
Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2023.
Builds on
17 of 47 references.
References · 17
- 2016Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalizationcited by 1,657
- 2017Computing Nonvacuous Generalization Bounds for Deep (Stochastic) Neural Networks with Many More Parameters than Training Datacited by 527
- 2019Online Learning: A Modern Introduction Using Convex Optimizationcited by 407
- 2017Non-convex learning via Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics: a nonasymptotic analysiscited by 242
- 2021User-friendly introduction to PAC-Bayes boundscited by 234
- 2016Coin Betting and Parameter-Free Online Learningcited by 131
- 2018Non-Vacuous Generalization Bounds at the ImageNet Scale: A PAC-Bayesian Compression Approachcited by 125
- 2015On the properties of variational approximations of Gibbs posteriorscited by 121
- 2020Tighter risk certificates for neural networkscited by 112
- 2021Tight Concentrations and Confidence Sequences from the Regret of Universal Portfoliocited by 42
- 2019PAC-Bayes Un-Expected Bernstein Inequalitycited by 36
- 2018Bayesian Counterfactual Risk Minimizationcited by 28
5 more
- 2019Parameter-Free Online Convex Optimization with Sub-Exponential Noisecited by 28
- 2015On Equivalence of Martingale Tail Bounds and Deterministic Regret Inequalitiescited by 27
- 2019Distribution-Dependent Analysis of Gibbs-ERM Principlecited by 17
- 2022Split-kl and PAC-Bayes-split-kl Inequalities for Ternary Random Variablescited by 11
- 2017A Tight Excess Risk Bound via a Unified PAC-Bayesian-Rademacher-Shtarkov-MDL Complexitycited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 4; 2024: 5; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
13 papers.
Sort:
- 2023More PAC-Bayes bounds: From bounded losses, to losses with general tail behaviors, to anytime validitycited by 17
- 2023Learning via Wasserstein-Based High Probability Generalisation Boundscited by 11
- 2024Better-than-KL PAC-Bayes Boundscited by 4
- 2024Recursive PAC-Bayes: A Frequentist Approach to Sequential Prior Updates with No Information Losscited by 4
- 2025Optimistic Interior Point Methods for Sequential Hypothesis Testing by Bettingcited by 4
- 2025How good is PAC-Bayes at explaining generalisation?cited by 4
- 2023Wasserstein PAC-Bayes Learning: Exploiting Optimisation Guarantees to Explain Generalisationcited by 3
- 2024Generalization Bounds via Conditional f-Informationcited by 3
- 2023Federated Learning with Nonvacuous Generalisation Boundscited by 2
- 2024Online-to-PAC generalization bounds under graph-mixing dependenciescited by 2
- 2024Sharp Matrix Empirical Bernstein Inequalitiescited by 2
- 2025Empirical PAC-Bayes Bounds for Markov Chainscited by 2
- 2026PAC-Bayes Beyond Parameter Space: Behavioral Equivalence, Z-Information, and Exact Complexity Decomposition11 Aug 2026
- 2025Empirical PAC-Bayes Bounds for Markov Chains25 Sep 2025
- 2025How good is PAC-Bayes at explaining generalisation?11 Mar 2025
- 2025Optimistic Interior Point Methods for Sequential Hypothesis Testing by Betting11 Feb 2025
- 2024Sharp Matrix Empirical Bernstein Inequalities14 Nov 2024
- 2024Generalization Bounds via Conditional f-Information30 Oct 2024
- 2024Online-to-PAC generalization bounds under graph-mixing dependencies11 Oct 2024
- 2024Recursive PAC-Bayes: A Frequentist Approach to Sequential Prior Updates with No Information Loss23 May 2024
- 2024Better-than-KL PAC-Bayes Bounds14 Feb 2024
- 2023Federated Learning with Nonvacuous Generalisation Bounds17 Oct 2023
- 2023More PAC-Bayes bounds: From bounded losses, to losses with general tail behaviors, to anytime validity21 Jun 2023
- 2023Learning via Wasserstein-Based High Probability Generalisation Bounds7 Jun 2023
- 2023More PAC-Bayes bounds: From bounded losses, to losses with general tail behaviors, to anytime validitycited by 17
- 2023Learning via Wasserstein-Based High Probability Generalisation Boundscited by 11
- 2024Better-than-KL PAC-Bayes Boundscited by 4
- 2024Recursive PAC-Bayes: A Frequentist Approach to Sequential Prior Updates with No Information Losscited by 4
- 2025Optimistic Interior Point Methods for Sequential Hypothesis Testing by Bettingcited by 4
- 2025How good is PAC-Bayes at explaining generalisation?cited by 4
- 2023Wasserstein PAC-Bayes Learning: Exploiting Optimisation Guarantees to Explain Generalisationcited by 3
- 2024Generalization Bounds via Conditional f-Informationcited by 3
- 2023Federated Learning with Nonvacuous Generalisation Boundscited by 2
- 2024Online-to-PAC generalization bounds under graph-mixing dependenciescited by 2
- 2024Sharp Matrix Empirical Bernstein Inequalitiescited by 2
- 2025Empirical PAC-Bayes Bounds for Markov Chainscited by 2
12 most cited of 13 All 13 (JSON)
- 2026PAC-Bayes Beyond Parameter Space: Behavioral Equivalence, Z-Information, and Exact Complexity Decomposition11 Aug 2026
- 2025Empirical PAC-Bayes Bounds for Markov Chains25 Sep 2025
- 2025How good is PAC-Bayes at explaining generalisation?11 Mar 2025
- 2025Optimistic Interior Point Methods for Sequential Hypothesis Testing by Betting11 Feb 2025
- 2024Sharp Matrix Empirical Bernstein Inequalities14 Nov 2024
- 2024Generalization Bounds via Conditional f-Information30 Oct 2024
- 2024Online-to-PAC generalization bounds under graph-mixing dependencies11 Oct 2024
- 2024Recursive PAC-Bayes: A Frequentist Approach to Sequential Prior Updates with No Information Loss23 May 2024
- 2024Better-than-KL PAC-Bayes Bounds14 Feb 2024
- 2023Federated Learning with Nonvacuous Generalisation Bounds17 Oct 2023
- 2023More PAC-Bayes bounds: From bounded losses, to losses with general tail behaviors, to anytime validity21 Jun 2023
- 2023Learning via Wasserstein-Based High Probability Generalisation Bounds7 Jun 2023
12 newest of 13 All 13 (JSON)