Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research establishes theoretical bounds for adaptive versus non-adaptive query strategies in model evaluation, demonstrating that while interaction offers a quadratic reduction in test requirements, it does not provide an exponential advantage over fixed-query methods. The study identifies specific conditions under which distribution classes can be reliably distinguished and quantifies the inherent error limits when such separation is absent. These findings offer critical insights for optimizing experimental designs in machine learning where query efficiency and adaptivity are paramount considerations.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Hypothesis Testing with Conditional Queries: Learnability and the Value of Interaction

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.06262v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model evaluations may fix all tests before observing any responses or select later tests using earlier responses. We study this choice in a conditional-query model on a finite outcome space $\mathcal{X}$ with $|\mathcal{X}|=N$. We first ask which pairs of distribution classes can be reliably distinguished. We then ask how many additional queries are required to match an adaptive tester when all queried events must be fixed in advance. We show that learnability holds if and only if the two classes have positive separation in their pairwise conditional probabilities. When this separation is zero, the optimal worst-case error is exactly $1/2$ at every finite query budget. For any $T$-query adaptive policy and any $\rho \in (0,1)$, we construct a randomized non-adaptive procedure using $O(N^2(T + \log(1/\rho)))$ pair queries chosen before any response is observed. Its simulated transcript is within $\rho$ in total variation of the adaptive transcript, uniformly over all distributions in the model. We also construct a matching family with constant adaptive query complexity and $\Omega_\varepsilon(N^2)$ non-adaptive query complexity. Consequently, the worst-case fixed-error adaptivity gap is $\Theta_\varepsilon(N^2)$. Thus interaction can reduce the required number of tests by a quadratic factor, but the apparent exponential branching of an interactive evaluation does not yield an exponential query advantage.

Abstract:Model evaluations may fix all tests before observing any responses or select later tests using earlier responses. We study this choice in a conditional-query model on a finite outcome space $\mathcal{X}$ with $|\mathcal{X}|=N$. We first ask which pairs of distribution classes can be reliably distinguished. We then ask how many additional queries are required to match an adaptive tester when all queried events must be fixed in advance. We show that learnability holds if and only if the two classes have positive separation in their pairwise conditional probabilities. When this separation is zero, the optimal worst-case error is exactly $1/2$ at every finite query budget. For any $T$-query adaptive policy and any $\rho \in (0,1)$, we construct a randomized non-adaptive procedure using $O(N^2(T + \log(1/\rho)))$ pair queries chosen before any response is observed. Its simulated transcript is within $\rho$ in total variation of the adaptive transcript, uniformly over all distributions in the model. We also construct a matching family with constant adaptive query complexity and $\Omega_\varepsilon(N^2)$ non-adaptive query complexity. Consequently, the worst-case fixed-error adaptivity gap is $\Theta_\varepsilon(N^2)$. Thus interaction can reduce the required number of tests by a quadratic factor, but the apparent exponential branching of an interactive evaluation does not yield an exponential query advantage.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Statistics Theory (math.ST)

arXiv:2608.06262 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.06262v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.06262 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 303 words

Related coverage