Multi-Task Learning for Metal Alloy Property Prediction: An Empirical Study of Negative Transfer and Mitigation Strategies

Power magnetic materials are characterized on the sinusoidal and triangular waveforms that excitation hardware conveniently produces, whereas deployed converters expose cores to trapezoidal, PWM-shaped flux trajectories, so loss models must predict exactly where their training data are thinnest. The final test of the MagNet Challenge embeds a deliberately extreme instance of this characterization-deployment mismatch: for material D, trapezoids form 16.4% of the test set but only 1.4% of the training set. The 95th-percentile relative error, hereafter p95, of the best submission, built on sequential transfer learning, stalled at 15.9%, the worst among the five materials. This paper shows that the obstacle is missing information under covariate shift rather than class imbalance, and that the missing support can be borrowed from sibling materials instead of being extrapolated. Controlled experiments first refute the imbalance reading: four standard remedies fail, and raising the trapezoidal share to the test-set level degrades accuracy further. The proposed material-identity support transfer, MIST, then trains one 2784-parameter predictor jointly on all five challenge materials. Material identity enters through feature-wise linear modulation, or FiLM, the scarce material's true-label loss is reweighted, and material D receives no fine-tuning, so that the bias of its trapezoid-free training set is never re-installed. MIST lowers the five-seed material-D p95 from 20.39+/-2.03% to 12.38+/-0.92% and the trapezoidal-class p95 from 37.4+/-8.8% to 15.16+/-1.69%, surpassing the best submission with one-sixth of its parameters and no fine-tuning stage; removing material identity at matched capacity inflates the error by an order of magnitude. These results argue that scarce materials should be characterized jointly with their siblings.

Multi-task learning shows strikingly inconsistent results -- sometimes joint training helps substantially, sometimes it actively harms performance -- yet the field lacks a principled framework for predicting these outcomes. We identify a fundamental but unstated assumption underlying gradient-based task analysis: tasks must share training instances for gradient conflicts to reveal genuine relationships. When tasks are measured on the same inputs, gradient alignment reflects shared mechanistic structure; when measured on disjoint inputs, any apparent signal conflates task relationships with distributional shift. We discover this sample overlap requirement exhibits a sharp phase transition: below 30% overlap, gradient-task correlations are statistically indistinguishable from noise; above 40%, they reliably recover known biological structure. Comprehensive validation across multiple datasets achieves strong correlations and recovers biological pathway organization. Standard benchmarks systematically violate this requirement -- MoleculeNet operates at <5% overlap, TDC at 8-14% -- far below the threshold where gradient analysis becomes meaningful. This provides the first principled explanation for seven years of inconsistent MTL results.

Multi-task reinforcement learning (MTRL) aims to train a single agent to efficiently optimize performance across multiple tasks simultaneously. However, jointly optimizing all tasks often yields imbalanced learning: agents quickly solve easy tasks but learn slowly on harder ones. While prior work primarily attributes this imbalance to conflicting task gradients and proposes gradient manipulation or specialized architectures to address it, we instead focus on a distinct and under-explored challenge: imbalanced data allocation. Standard MTRL allocates an equal number of environment interactions to each task, which over-allocates data to easy tasks that require relatively few interactions to solve and under-allocates data to hard tasks that require substantially more experience to solve. To address this challenge, we introduce Distributionally Robust Adaptive Task Sampling (DRATS), an algorithm that adaptively prioritizes sampling tasks furthest from being solved. We derive DRATS by formalizing MTRL as a feasibility problem from which we derive a minimax objective for minimizing the worst-case return gap, the difference between a desired target return and the agent's return on a task. In benchmarks like MetaWorld-MT10 and MT50, DRATS improves data efficiency and increases worst-task performance compared to existing task sampling algorithms.