Limits of Transfer Learning

Transfer learning explores how to leverage knowledge from various tasks or domains (sources) to enhance predictive performance in related tasks or domains (targets). Typically, transfer learning research is segmented into several isolated sub-areas (such as domain generalisation, domain adaptation, or multi-domain learning), each making distinct assumptions about target data availability, namely how much data and how many labels are available at training time. However, in many real-world applications, data availability is not fixed but evolves over time, as instances and labels are progressively collected from a new domain. Each of the classical settings then describes only a snapshot of a trajectory that a deployed system must traverse in full. We formalise this trajectory as a transfer learning problem in its own right, Transfer Learning for Evolving Domains (TrED), specified by a data availability process fixed by the environment, a learning protocol that the method is free to choose, and an evaluation criterion that scores the whole trajectory of models rather than a single one. Within this formalism, the classical settings are recovered as regimes that a learner may pass through, rather than as separate problems that TrED concatenates. We then examine the transfer learning literature to identify mechanisms that are promising building blocks for a solution, and find that most methods are tailored to a single regime and that even the strongest existing candidates do not yet optimise the whole trajectory. We argue that TrED is a well-posed and unsolved problem, and an important direction for future research.

Transfer learning is an essential technique for many machine learning/AI models of complex structures such as large language models and generative AI. The essence of transfer learning is to leverage knowledge from resolved source tasks for a new target task, especially when the sample size $m$ of the training data for the latter is low. In this work, we rigorously analyze the potential benefit of transfer learning in terms of sample efficiency. Specifically, taking an optimal transport viewpoint of transfer learning, we find that when the data dimension $d$ is higher than $3$, the sample complexity for transfer learning is $O(m^{-(α+1)/d})$, with $α$ indicating the smoothness of the data distribution, as opposed to the $O(m^{-p/d})$ sample complexity for direct learning with $p$ indicating the smoothness of the optimal target model. Our finding theoretically supports a better sample efficiency for transfer learning, when the target task is optimizing over a family of not-so-smooth models (i.e., highly complex networks with the possible use of non-smooth activation functions). Using image classification as an example, we numerically demonstrate the sample efficiency for transfer learning, that is, in the data hungry regime, the model performance can be significantly improved by transfer learning.

When a learner faces a new task with few samples, it must leverage any available side information. In practice, this often comes in the form of model evaluations on related tasks in public benchmarks. A key question then is how to model task relatedness such that it is both realistic and the benchmark evaluations lead to provable gains. Empirically, we observe that weak monotonicity is often approximately satisfied: if a model dominates another on many benchmarks, it also tends to outperform on the new task. We explore the statistical complexity of learning under (approximate) weak monotonicity, leveraging it within two learning paradigms: transfer learning and model selection aggregation. We show that not only can we prune the model class based on monotonicity, but we can also further adapt to the geometry of the available trade-offs by hedging on the frontier.