Distribution-Free Sequential Prediction with Abstentions
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
We study a sequential prediction problem in which an adversary is allowed to inject arbitrarily many adversarial instances in a stream of i.i.d.\ instances, but at each round, the learner may also \emph{abstain} from making a prediction without incurring any penalty if the instance was indeed corrupted. This semi-adversarial setting naturally sits between the classical stochastic case with i.i.d.\ instances for which function classes with finite VC dimension are learnable; and the adversarial case with arbitrary instances, known to be significantly more restrictive. For this problem, Goel et al. (2023) showed that, if the learner knows the distribution $μ$ of clean samples in advance, learning can be achieved for all VC classes without restrictions on adversary corruptions. This is, however, a strong assumption in both theory and practice: a natural question is whether similar learning guarantees can be achieved without prior distributional knowledge, as is standard in classical learning frameworks (e.g., PAC learning or asymptotic consistency) and other non-i.i.d.\ models (e.g., smoothed online learning). We therefore focus on the distribution-free setting where $μ$ is \emph{unknown} and propose an algorithm \textsc{AbstainBoost} based on a boosting procedure of weak learners, which guarantees sublinear error for general VC classes in \emph{distribution-free} abstention learning for oblivious adversaries. These algorithms also enjoy similar guarantees for adaptive adversaries, for structured function classes including linear classifiers. These results are complemented with corresponding lower bounds, which reveal an interesting polynomial trade-off between misclassification error and number of erroneous abstentions.
Results and benchmarks
We study a sequential prediction problem in which an adversary is allowed to inject arbitrarily many adversarial instances in a stream of i.i.d.\ instances, but at each round, the learner may also \emph{abstain} from making a prediction without incurring any penalty if the instance was indeed corrupted.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPX