mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Foundation Model's Embedded Representations May Detect Distribution Shift

arXiv 2310.13836 ↗First posted 20 Oct 2023cs.LG cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Sampling biases can cause distribution shifts between train and test datasets for supervised learning tasks, obscuring our ability to understand the generalization capacity of a model. This is especially important considering the wide adoption of pre-trained foundational neural networks -- whose behavior remains poorly understood -- for transfer learning (TL) tasks. We present a case study for TL on the Sentiment140 dataset and show that many pre-trained foundation models encode different representations of Sentiment140's manually curated test set M from the automatically labeled training set P, confirming that a distribution shift has occurred. We argue training on P and measuring performance on M is a biased measure of generalization. Experiments on pre-trained GPT-2 show that the features learnable from P do not improve (and in fact hamper) performance on M. Linear probes on pre-trained GPT-2's representations are robust and may even outperform overall fine-tuning, implying a fundamental importance for discerning distribution shift in train/test splits for model interpretation.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Oct 2023.

Builds on

40 of 60 references.

References · 40

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  4. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  5. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  6. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,694
  7. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  8. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  9. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  10. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
  11. 2023Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 4,362
  12. 2022Robust Speech Recognition via Large-Scale Weak Supervisioncited by 3,972
28 more
  1. 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,048
  2. 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
  3. 2019HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processingcited by 2,201
  4. 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,718
  5. 2019Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisitedcited by 1,695
  6. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  7. 2014How transferable are features in deep neural networks?cited by 1,216
  8. 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 831
  9. 2023The RefinedWeb Dataset for Falcon LLM: Outperforming Curated Corpora with Web Data, and Web Data Onlycited by 755
  10. 2022Fine-Tuning can Distort Pretrained Features and Underperform Out-of-Distributioncited by 722
  11. 2019Generalizing from a Few Examples: A Survey on Few-Shot Learningcited by 462
  12. 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 452
  13. 2017Supervised Learning of Universal Sentence Representations from Natural Language Inference Datacited by 428
  14. 2019The generalization error of random features regression: Precise asymptotics and double descent curvecited by 410
  15. 2018Insights on representational similarity in neural networks with canonical correlationcited by 318
  16. 2021Exploring the Limits of Out-of-Distribution Detectioncited by 283
  17. 2016Transfer Learning for Low-Resource Neural Machine Translationcited by 188
  18. 2017Learning to Generate Reviews and Discovering Sentimentcited by 147
  19. 2018Deep Learning for Sentiment Analysis : A Surveycited by 139
  20. 2016Toward Deeper Understanding of Neural Networks: The Power of Initialization and a Dual View on Expressivitycited by 138
  21. 2021Toward Understanding the Feature Learning Process of Self-supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 119
  22. 2019On the Power and Limitations of Random Features for Understanding Neural Networkscited by 103
  23. 2022Head2Toe: Utilizing Intermediate Representations for Better Transfer Learningcited by 83
  24. 2020Understanding Double Descent Requires a Fine-Grained Bias-Variance Decompositioncited by 75
  25. 2022Domain-Adjusted Regression or: ERM May Already Learn Features Sufficient for Out-of-Distribution Generalizationcited by 69
  26. 2015Deep Neural Networks with Random Gaussian Weights: A Universal Classification Strategy?cited by 40
  27. 2023Is Fine-tuning Needed? Pre-trained Language Models Are Near Perfect for Out-of-Domain Detectioncited by 29
  28. 2018Language Modeling Teaches You More Syntax than Translation Does: Lessons Learned Through Auxiliary Task Analysiscited by 17

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.