analiza aiqbench
This paper provides a rigorous theoretical analysis of Measure Consistency Regularization (MCR), establishing conditions under which it improves finite-sample estimation error over standard supervised training for partially observed data. By bridging the gap between empirical success and mathematical proof, the authors offer a practical diagnostic tool to determine when MCR yields benefits in real-world scenarios involving missing features or modalities.
Theoretical Analysis of Measure Consistency Regularization for Partially Observed Data
arXiv:2602.01437v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The problem of corrupted data, missing features, or missing modalities continues to plague the modern machine learning landscape. To address this issue, a class of regularization methods that enforce consistency between imputed and fully observed data has emerged as a promising approach for improving model generalization, particularly in partially observed settings. We refer to this class of methods as Measure Consistency Regularization (MCR). Despite its empirical success in various applications, such as image inpainting, data imputation and semi-supervised learning, a fundamental understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of MCR remains limited. This paper bridges this gap by offering theoretical insights into when MCR yields a more favorable finite-sample estimation-error upper bound, viewed through the lens of neural network distance. Under ideal interpolation and compatibility conditions, we show that the MCR estimation-error upper bound is no larger than vanilla supervised training and becomes strictly smaller when the mixed-sample alternative is favorable. We then extend the analysis to the non-ideal regime, where optimization and compatibility residuals can potentially offset this finite-sample advantage. Guided by these insights, we propose a novel practical diagnostic that leverages the duality gap and a calibrated drift estimator to infer the potential benefit of MCR training. We present detailed empirical evidence to support our theoretical claims and to show the effectiveness and accuracy of our practical diagnostic. We further provide simulations on real-world datasets to show the versatility of MCR under different model architectures designed for different data sources.
Abstract:The problem of corrupted data, missing features, or missing modalities continues to plague the modern machine learning landscape. To address this issue, a class of regularization methods that enforce consistency between imputed and fully observed data has emerged as a promising approach for improving model generalization, particularly in partially observed settings. We refer to this class of methods as Measure Consistency Regularization (MCR). Despite its empirical success in various applications, such as image inpainting, data imputation and semi-supervised learning, a fundamental understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of MCR remains limited. This paper bridges this gap by offering theoretical insights into when MCR yields a more favorable finite-sample estimation-error upper bound, viewed through the lens of neural network distance. Under ideal interpolation and compatibility conditions, we show that the MCR estimation-error upper bound is no larger than vanilla supervised training and becomes strictly smaller when the mixed-sample alternative is favorable. We then extend the analysis to the non-ideal regime, where optimization and compatibility residuals can potentially offset this finite-sample advantage. Guided by these insights, we propose a novel practical diagnostic that leverages the duality gap and a calibrated drift estimator to infer the potential benefit of MCR training. We present detailed empirical evidence to support our theoretical claims and to show the effectiveness and accuracy of our practical diagnostic. We further provide simulations on real-world datasets to show the versatility of MCR under different model architectures designed for different data sources.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Machine Learning (stat.ML)
arXiv:2602.01437 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2602.01437v2 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.01437 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 335 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026

Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · 27 sept. 2026

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · 27 iul. 2026

Reviewing failure modes in science as we prepare for AI researchers
LessWrong · 8 oct. 2026