A Farewell to the Bias-Variance Tradeoff? An Overview of the Theory of Overparameterized Machine Learning

The practical success of deep learning has led to the discovery of several surprising phenomena. One of these phenomena, that has spurred intense theoretical research, is ``benign overfitting'': deep neural networks seem to generalize well in the over-parametrized regime even though the networks show a perfect fit to noisy training data. It is now known that benign overfitting also occurs in various classical statistical models. For linear maximum margin classifiers, benign overfitting has been established theoretically in a class of mixture models with very strong assumptions on the covariate distribution. However, even in this simple setting, many questions remain open. For instance, most of the existing literature focuses on the noiseless case where all true class labels are observed without errors, whereas the more interesting noisy case remains poorly understood. We provide a comprehensive study of benign overfitting for linear maximum margin classifiers. We discover a phase transition in test error bounds for the noisy model which was previously unknown and provide some geometric intuition behind it. We further considerably relax the required covariate assumptions in both the noisy and noiseless cases. Our results demonstrate that benign overfitting of maximum margin classifiers holds in a much wider range of scenarios than was previously known and provide new insights into the underlying mechanisms.

Conventional wisdom in deep learning holds that overparameterization---having more parameters $p$ than training samples $n$---is benign: larger models generalize better and, even without regularization, interpolating models generalize well, the test error following a double-descent curve. One might expect the same benign overfitting for diffusion models, whose training reduces to regression, i.e. to minimizing a quadratic score-matching loss. Yet the opposite is observed: overfitting here is catastrophic, driving the model into a memorization regime. We resolve this paradox by combining experiments on U-Nets trained on CelebA with a random-features model for which we derive closed-form learning curves. We show that with a fixed number $m$ of noise realizations per training sample, an interpolation peak does occur, but at $p\sim nm$ rather than at $p\sim n$ as in standard regression. The rise of the test loss, however, sets in much earlier, at $p\sim n$, independently of $m$. This overfitting is malign because, although the implicit regularization of training is fully at work, it drives the model toward the empirical score, which memorizes the training set, rather than toward the true score. A bias-variance decomposition pinpoints the mechanism: the bias of the score estimator starts to grow at $p\sim n$; past the peak the variance decays, as in regression, whereas the bias keeps growing and both saturate at a large value. Since diffusion models are trained with $m\gg1$, the peak is pushed to very large model sizes, and therefore sit on the rising branch that precedes it, where malign overfitting is already in play. Nevertheless, overparameterization remains beneficial when paired with regularization: in the random-features theory and in U-Net experiments, optimally regularized large models---via a ridge penalty or early stopping, respectively---outperform any unregularized models.

We study grokking, the onset of generalization long after overfitting, in a classical ridge regression setting. We prove end-to-end grokking results for learning over-parameterized linear regression models using gradient descent with weight decay. Specifically, we prove that the following stages occur: (i) the model overfits the training data early during training; (ii) poor generalization persists long after overfitting has manifested; and (iii) the generalization error eventually becomes arbitrarily small. Moreover, we show, both theoretically and empirically, that grokking can be amplified or eliminated in a principled manner through proper hyperparameter tuning. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first rigorous quantitative bounds on the generalization delay (which we refer to as the "grokking time") in terms of training hyperparameters. Lastly, going beyond the linear setting, we empirically demonstrate that our quantitative bounds also capture the behavior of grokking on non-linear neural networks. Our results suggest that grokking is not an inherent failure mode of deep learning, but rather a consequence of specific training conditions, and thus does not require fundamental changes to the model architecture or learning algorithm to avoid.