arXiv subjects

Parikshit Gopalan

Publications and source records attributed to Parikshit Gopalan.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Universal Hardness From Masking Channels

We prove a broad learning-theoretic generalization of the celebrated hardcore lemma concerning the average-case complexity of computing a Boolean function (Impagliazzo, 1995). Our starting point is the observation that the classic notion of a hardcore measure, which reweights a function's input distribution, is equivalent to an input-dependent masking channel that injects randomness into the function's output distribution until it appears fully pseudorandom. The analogue of density of the measure is the fidelity of the channel. From this viewpoint, we develop a general framework for certifying hardness that allows for non-Boolean functions $f$ and a wide range of notions of hardness besides the classic 0-1 loss, by choosing the right notion of fidelity via convex duality. We show the difficulty of learning $f$ using a class $\mathcal{C}$ to minimize a convex loss is tightly characterized by the maximum fidelity possible for a masking channel, which measures the least amount of noise the channel must add to hide the structure of $f$ and make it $\mathcal{C}$-indistinguishable from random noise. Using our framework, we derive a number of multiclass generalizations of the hardcore lemma, and reveal some unexpected subtleties in going to larger alphabets. We construct a universal masking channel that applies to many natural notions of hardness simultaneously. Such channels are dual to omnipredictors, which optimize multiple losses at once (Gopalan, Kalai, Reingold, Sharan, and Wieder, 2022). We observe a symmetry between masking channels and generalizations of the hardcore lemma using pseudoentropy. We present a tight characterization of pseudoentropy using the MaxEnt algorithm from machine learning. A long line of research has shown that learning and hardness are two sides of the same coin; our framework gives a crisp and general formulation of this principle via convex duality.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Agnostic Learning by Imitating

Given a class of machine learning models and sample access to a data distribution with binary labels, which computational task is harder: training a discriminative model that distinguishes positive and negative labels as well as the best member of the class, or training a generative model whose outputs are indistinguishable from real data by all members of the class? We prove that these two fundamental tasks in computational learning theory are not just closely related, but actually equivalent to each other in complexity. One direction of this equivalence was previously known. Indeed, the powerful regularity lemma in complexity theory gives an efficient oracle reduction from the indistinguishability task (a.k.a. multiaccuracy) to the distinguishing task (a.k.a. agnostic learning) in the style of boosting algorithms. Our main contribution is an efficient oracle reduction in the other direction. Taking this idea further, we show that a multiaccuracy oracle is a remarkably powerful primitive, achieving not just agnostic learning but also a wide range of seemingly more demanding learning objectives via similarly efficient and direct constructions. Our results crucially use the power of making adaptive queries to the oracle, and stand in stark contrast to prior work, which showed that post-processing a single multiaccurate predictor is insufficient for even weak forms of learning. On a technical level, we draw a connection between our (offline) problem and a version of no-regret learning in the online setting, which allows us to use follow-the-leader type algorithms to modify the label distribution and aggregate the predictions of the multiaccuracy oracle.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Multigroup Fairness and Omniprediction: Separations and Equivalences

Omniprediction is a learning guarantee which requires a single predictor to be competitive relative to the best hypothesis from a benchmark class for any loss chosen from a family of loss functions. Loss Outcome Indistinguishability (loss OI for short) is a stronger notion that implies omniprediction. It requires the predicted distribution on labels to be indistinguishable from the true distribution to tests that depend on the loss functions and the benchmark class. Multiaccuracy and multicalibration are multigroup fairness notions that generalize classical notions of calibration and accuracy in expectation. Most known learning algorithms for omniprediction (both for the standard notion and for strengthenings like loss OI) rely on some version of these multigroup fairness notions, or on an intermediate notion called calibrated multiaccuracy. We ask if this is necessary: Does omniprediction require some form of multigroup fairness? We show that the answer is no for (plain) omniprediction, and yes for loss OI. First, a sequence of works shows that multicalibration or calibrated multiaccuracy imply omniprediction. We rule out even a weak converse, by showing that omniprediction for proper losses does not imply even accuracy in expectation, a much weaker notion than any of calibration, multiaccuracy, or multicalibration. Second, prior work showed how to achieve loss OI from a combination of calibration and multiaccuracy. We show a converse: loss OI is equivalent to a form of calibrated multiaccuracy.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Flexible Routing via Uncertainty Decomposition

A key strategy for balancing performance and cost in modern machine learning systems is to dynamically route queries to either a low-cost model or a more expensive oracle (such as a large pretrained model or human expert), an approach known as model routing. In this work we present a new uncertainty-aware router that (1) avoids unnecessary oracle calls on inherently ambiguous queries, and (2) adapts dynamically to different loss functions and cost parameters through simple hyperparameter changes, without retraining. Our method, applicable to any classification setting where multiple independent annotations per input are available, is based on decomposing total uncertainty into irreducible and reducible components using higher-order predictors [Ahdritz et al., 2025]. This enables a unified approach to both routing and abstention: predict with the weak model when uncertainty is low, route to the oracle when reducible uncertainty is high, and abstain when irreducible uncertainty is high. Our router comes with strong theoretical guarantees bounding regret relative to optimal task-specific routers. We conduct experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets that demonstrate the benefits of our approach in suitable regimes -- in particular, whenever reducible and irreducible uncertainty are not too correlated.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

The Importance of Being Smoothly Calibrated

Recent work has highlighted the centrality of smooth calibration [Kakade and Foster, 2008] as a robust measure of calibration error. We generalize, unify, and extend previous results on smooth calibration, both as a robust calibration measure, and as a step towards omniprediction, which enables predictions with low regret for downstream decision makers seeking to optimize some proper loss unknown to the predictor. We present a new omniprediction guarantee for smoothly calibrated predictors, for the class of all bounded proper losses. We smooth the predictor by adding some noise to it, and compete against smoothed versions of any benchmark predictor on the space, where we add some noise to the predictor and then post-process it arbitrarily. The omniprediction error is bounded by the smooth calibration error of the predictor and the earth mover's distance from the benchmark. We exhibit instances showing that this dependence cannot, in general, be improved. We show how this unifies and extends prior results [Foster and Vohra, 1998; Hartline, Wu, and Yang, 2025] on omniprediction from smooth calibration. We present a crisp new characterization of smooth calibration in terms of the earth mover's distance to the closest perfectly calibrated joint distribution of predictions and labels. This also yields a simpler proof of the relation to the lower distance to calibration from [Blasiok, Gopalan, Hu, and Nakkiran, 2023]. We use this to show that the upper distance to calibration cannot be estimated within a quadratic factor with sample complexity independent of the support size of the predictions. This is in contrast to the distance to calibration, where the corresponding problem was known to be information-theoretically impossible: no finite number of samples suffice [Blasiok, Gopalan, Hu, and Nakkiran, 2023].

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

How Global Calibration Strengthens Multiaccuracy

Multiaccuracy and multicalibration are multigroup fairness notions for prediction that have found numerous applications in learning and computational complexity. They can be achieved from a single learning primitive: weak agnostic learning. Here we investigate the power of multiaccuracy as a learning primitive, both with and without the additional assumption of calibration. We find that multiaccuracy in itself is rather weak, but that the addition of global calibration (this notion is called calibrated multiaccuracy) boosts its power substantially, enough to recover implications that were previously known only assuming the stronger notion of multicalibration. We give evidence that multiaccuracy might not be as powerful as standard weak agnostic learning, by showing that there is no way to post-process a multiaccurate predictor to get a weak learner, even assuming the best hypothesis has correlation $1/2$. Rather, we show that it yields a restricted form of weak agnostic learning, which requires some concept in the class to have correlation greater than $1/2$ with the labels. However, by also requiring the predictor to be calibrated, we recover not just weak, but strong agnostic learning. A similar picture emerges when we consider the derivation of hardcore measures from predictors satisfying multigroup fairness notions. On the one hand, while multiaccuracy only yields hardcore measures of density half the optimal, we show that (a weighted version of) calibrated multiaccuracy achieves optimal density. Our results yield new insights into the complementary roles played by multiaccuracy and calibration in each setting. They shed light on why multiaccuracy and global calibration, although not particularly powerful by themselves, together yield considerably stronger notions.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

The communication complexity of distributed estimation

We study an extension of the standard two-party communication model in which Alice and Bob hold probability distributions $p$ and $q$ over domains $X$ and $Y$, respectively. Their goal is to estimate \[ \mathbb{E}_{x \sim p,\, y \sim q}[f(x, y)] \] to within additive error $\varepsilon$ for a bounded function $f$, known to both parties. We refer to this as the distributed estimation problem. Special cases of this problem arise in a variety of areas including sketching, databases and learning. Our goal is to understand how the required communication scales with the communication complexity of $f$ and the error parameter $\varepsilon$. The random sampling approach -- estimating the mean by averaging $f$ over $O(1/\varepsilon^2)$ random samples -- requires $O(R(f)/\varepsilon^2)$ total communication, where $R(f)$ is the randomized communication complexity of $f$. We design a new debiasing protocol which improves the dependence on $1/\varepsilon$ to be linear instead of quadratic. Additionally we show better upper bounds for several special classes of functions, including the Equality and Greater-than functions. We introduce lower bound techniques based on spectral methods and discrepancy, and show the optimality of many of our protocols: the debiasing protocol is tight for general functions, and that our protocols for the equality and greater-than functions are also optimal. Furthermore, we show that among full-rank Boolean functions, Equality is essentially the easiest.

cs.CC↗

arXiv2025

Efficient Calibration for Decision Making

A decision-theoretic characterization of perfect calibration is that an agent seeking to minimize a proper loss in expectation cannot improve their outcome by post-processing a perfectly calibrated predictor. Hu and Wu (FOCS'24) use this to define an approximate calibration measure called calibration decision loss ($\mathsf{CDL}$), which measures the maximal improvement achievable by any post-processing over any proper loss. Unfortunately, $\mathsf{CDL}$ turns out to be intractable to even weakly approximate in the offline setting, given black-box access to the predictions and labels. We suggest circumventing this by restricting attention to structured families of post-processing functions $K$. We define the calibration decision loss relative to $K$, denoted $\mathsf{CDL}_K$ where we consider all proper losses but restrict post-processings to a structured family $K$. We develop a comprehensive theory of when $\mathsf{CDL}_K$ is information-theoretically and computationally tractable, and use it to prove both upper and lower bounds for natural classes $K$. In addition to introducing new definitions and algorithmic techniques to the theory of calibration for decision making, our results give rigorous guarantees for some widely used recalibration procedures in machine learning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Calibration through the Lens of Indistinguishability

Calibration is a classical notion from the forecasting literature which aims to address the question: how should predicted probabilities be interpreted? In a world where we only get to observe (discrete) outcomes, how should we evaluate a predictor that hypothesizes (continuous) probabilities over possible outcomes? The study of calibration has seen a surge of recent interest, given the ubiquity of probabilistic predictions in machine learning. This survey describes recent work on the foundational questions of how to define and measure calibration error, and what these measures mean for downstream decision makers who wish to use the predictions to make decisions. A unifying viewpoint that emerges is that of calibration as a form of indistinguishability, between the world hypothesized by the predictor and the real world (governed by nature or the Bayes optimal predictor). In this view, various calibration measures quantify the extent to which the two worlds can be told apart by certain classes of distinguishers or statistical measures.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Learning to Route LLMs with Confidence Tokens

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on several tasks and are increasingly deployed in real-world applications. However, especially in high-stakes settings, it becomes vital to know when the output of an LLM may be unreliable. Depending on whether an answer is trustworthy, a system can then choose to route the question to another expert, or otherwise fall back on a safe default behavior. In this work, we study the extent to which LLMs can reliably indicate confidence in their answers, and how this notion of confidence can translate into downstream accuracy gains. We propose Self-Reflection with Error-based Feedback (Self-REF), a lightweight training strategy to teach LLMs to express confidence in whether their answers are correct in a reliable manner. Self-REF introduces confidence tokens into the LLM, from which a confidence score can be extracted. Compared to conventional approaches such as verbalizing confidence and examining token probabilities, we demonstrate empirically that confidence tokens show significant improvements in downstream routing and rejection learning tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

When does a predictor know its own loss?

Given a predictor and a loss function, how well can we predict the loss that the predictor will incur on an input? This is the problem of loss prediction, a key computational task associated with uncertainty estimation for a predictor. In a classification setting, a predictor will typically predict a distribution over labels and hence have its own estimate of the loss that it will incur, given by the entropy of the predicted distribution. Should we trust this estimate? In other words, when does the predictor know what it knows and what it does not know? In this work we study the theoretical foundations of loss prediction. Our main contribution is to establish tight connections between nontrivial loss prediction and certain forms of multicalibration, a multigroup fairness notion that asks for calibrated predictions across computationally identifiable subgroups. Formally, we show that a loss predictor that is able to improve on the self-estimate of a predictor yields a witness to a failure of multicalibration, and vice versa. This has the implication that nontrivial loss prediction is in effect no easier or harder than auditing for multicalibration. We support our theoretical results with experiments that show a robust positive correlation between the multicalibration error of a predictor and the efficacy of training a loss predictor.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Provable Uncertainty Decomposition via Higher-Order Calibration

We give a principled method for decomposing the predictive uncertainty of a model into aleatoric and epistemic components with explicit semantics relating them to the real-world data distribution. While many works in the literature have proposed such decompositions, they lack the type of formal guarantees we provide. Our method is based on the new notion of higher-order calibration, which generalizes ordinary calibration to the setting of higher-order predictors that predict mixtures over label distributions at every point. We show how to measure as well as achieve higher-order calibration using access to $k$-snapshots, namely examples where each point has $k$ independent conditional labels. Under higher-order calibration, the estimated aleatoric uncertainty at a point is guaranteed to match the real-world aleatoric uncertainty averaged over all points where the prediction is made. To our knowledge, this is the first formal guarantee of this type that places no assumptions whatsoever on the real-world data distribution. Importantly, higher-order calibration is also applicable to existing higher-order predictors such as Bayesian and ensemble models and provides a natural evaluation metric for such models. We demonstrate through experiments that our method produces meaningful uncertainty decompositions for image classification.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

On Computationally Efficient Multi-Class Calibration

Consider a multi-class labelling problem, where the labels can take values in $[k]$, and a predictor predicts a distribution over the labels. In this work, we study the following foundational question: Are there notions of multi-class calibration that give strong guarantees of meaningful predictions and can be achieved in time and sample complexities polynomial in $k$? Prior notions of calibration exhibit a tradeoff between computational efficiency and expressivity: they either suffer from having sample complexity exponential in $k$, or needing to solve computationally intractable problems, or give rather weak guarantees. Our main contribution is a notion of calibration that achieves all these desiderata: we formulate a robust notion of projected smooth calibration for multi-class predictions, and give new recalibration algorithms for efficiently calibrating predictors under this definition with complexity polynomial in $k$. Projected smooth calibration gives strong guarantees for all downstream decision makers who want to use the predictor for binary classification problems of the form: does the label belong to a subset $T \subseteq [k]$: e.g. is this an image of an animal? It ensures that the probabilities predicted by summing the probabilities assigned to labels in $T$ are close to some perfectly calibrated binary predictor for that task. We also show that natural strengthenings of our definition are computationally hard to achieve: they run into information theoretic barriers or computational intractability. Underlying both our upper and lower bounds is a tight connection that we prove between multi-class calibration and the well-studied problem of agnostic learning in the (standard) binary prediction setting.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Omnipredictors for Regression and the Approximate Rank of Convex Functions

Consider the supervised learning setting where the goal is to learn to predict labels $\mathbf y$ given points $\mathbf x$ from a distribution. An \textit{omnipredictor} for a class $\mathcal L$ of loss functions and a class $\mathcal C$ of hypotheses is a predictor whose predictions incur less expected loss than the best hypothesis in $\mathcal C$ for every loss in $\mathcal L$. Since the work of [GKR+21] that introduced the notion, there has been a large body of work in the setting of binary labels where $\mathbf y \in \{0, 1\}$, but much less is known about the regression setting where $\mathbf y \in [0,1]$ can be continuous. Our main conceptual contribution is the notion of \textit{sufficient statistics} for loss minimization over a family of loss functions: these are a set of statistics about a distribution such that knowing them allows one to take actions that minimize the expected loss for any loss in the family. The notion of sufficient statistics relates directly to the approximate rank of the family of loss functions. Our key technical contribution is a bound of $O(1/\varepsilon^{2/3})$ on the $ε$-approximate rank of convex, Lipschitz functions on the interval $[0,1]$, which we show is tight up to a factor of $\mathrm{polylog} (1/ε)$. This yields improved runtimes for learning omnipredictors for the class of all convex, Lipschitz loss functions under weak learnability assumptions about the class $\mathcal C$. We also give efficient omnipredictors when the loss families have low-degree polynomial approximations, or arise from generalized linear models (GLMs). This translation from sufficient statistics to faster omnipredictors is made possible by lifting the technique of loss outcome indistinguishability introduced by [GKH+23] for Boolean labels to the regression setting.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Swap Agnostic Learning, or Characterizing Omniprediction via Multicalibration

We introduce and study Swap Agnostic Learning. The problem can be phrased as a game between a predictor and an adversary: first, the predictor selects a hypothesis $h$; then, the adversary plays in response, and for each level set of the predictor $\{x \in \mathcal{X} : h(x) = v\}$ selects a (different) loss-minimizing hypothesis $c_v \in \mathcal{C}$; the predictor wins if $h$ competes with the adaptive adversary's loss. Despite the strength of the adversary, we demonstrate the feasibility Swap Agnostic Learning for any convex loss. Somewhat surprisingly, the result follows through an investigation into the connections between Omniprediction and Multicalibration. Omniprediction is a new notion of optimality for predictors that strengthtens classical notions such as agnostic learning. It asks for loss minimization guarantees (relative to a hypothesis class) that apply not just for a specific loss function, but for any loss belonging to a rich family of losses. A recent line of work shows that omniprediction is implied by multicalibration and related multi-group fairness notions. This unexpected connection raises the question: is multi-group fairness necessary for omniprediction? Our work gives the first affirmative answer to this question. We establish an equivalence between swap variants of omniprediction and multicalibration and swap agnostic learning. Further, swap multicalibration is essentially equivalent to the standard notion of multicalibration, so existing learning algorithms can be used to achieve any of the three notions. Building on this characterization, we paint a complete picture of the relationship between different variants of multi-group fairness, omniprediction, and Outcome Indistinguishability. This inquiry reveals a unified notion of OI that captures all existing notions of omniprediction and multicalibration.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Loss Minimization Yields Multicalibration for Large Neural Networks

Multicalibration is a notion of fairness for predictors that requires them to provide calibrated predictions across a large set of protected groups. Multicalibration is known to be a distinct goal than loss minimization, even for simple predictors such as linear functions. In this work, we consider the setting where the protected groups can be represented by neural networks of size $k$, and the predictors are neural networks of size $n > k$. We show that minimizing the squared loss over all neural nets of size $n$ implies multicalibration for all but a bounded number of unlucky values of $n$. We also give evidence that our bound on the number of unlucky values is tight, given our proof technique. Previously, results of the flavor that loss minimization yields multicalibration were known only for predictors that were near the ground truth, hence were rather limited in applicability. Unlike these, our results rely on the expressivity of neural nets and utilize the representation of the predictor.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

When Does Optimizing a Proper Loss Yield Calibration?

Optimizing proper loss functions is popularly believed to yield predictors with good calibration properties; the intuition being that for such losses, the global optimum is to predict the ground-truth probabilities, which is indeed calibrated. However, typical machine learning models are trained to approximately minimize loss over restricted families of predictors, that are unlikely to contain the ground truth. Under what circumstances does optimizing proper loss over a restricted family yield calibrated models? What precise calibration guarantees does it give? In this work, we provide a rigorous answer to these questions. We replace the global optimality with a local optimality condition stipulating that the (proper) loss of the predictor cannot be reduced much by post-processing its predictions with a certain family of Lipschitz functions. We show that any predictor with this local optimality satisfies smooth calibration as defined in Kakade-Foster (2008), Błasiok et al. (2023). Local optimality is plausibly satisfied by well-trained DNNs, which suggests an explanation for why they are calibrated from proper loss minimization alone. Finally, we show that the connection between local optimality and calibration error goes both ways: nearly calibrated predictors are also nearly locally optimal.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Agnostically Learning Single-Index Models using Omnipredictors

We give the first result for agnostically learning Single-Index Models (SIMs) with arbitrary monotone and Lipschitz activations. All prior work either held only in the realizable setting or required the activation to be known. Moreover, we only require the marginal to have bounded second moments, whereas all prior work required stronger distributional assumptions (such as anticoncentration or boundedness). Our algorithm is based on recent work by [GHK$^+$23] on omniprediction using predictors satisfying calibrated multiaccuracy. Our analysis is simple and relies on the relationship between Bregman divergences (or matching losses) and $\ell_p$ distances. We also provide new guarantees for standard algorithms like GLMtron and logistic regression in the agnostic setting.

cs.LG↗