user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: On the importance of single directions for generalization

Paper content:
Despite their ability to memorize large datasets, deep neural networks often achieve good generalization performance.
However, the differences between the learned solutions of networks which generalize and those which do not remain unclear.
Additionally, the tuning properties of single directions (defined as the activation of a single unit or some linear combination of units in response to some input) have been highlighted, but their importance has not been evaluated.
Here, we connect these lines of inquiry to demonstrate that a network’s reliance on single directions is a good predictor of its generalization performance, across networks trained on datasets with different fractions of corrupted labels, across ensembles of networks trained on datasets with unmodified labels, across different hyper- parameters, and over the course of training.
While dropout only regularizes this quantity up to a point, batch normalization implicitly discourages single direction reliance, in part by decreasing the class selectivity of individual units.
Finally, we find that class selectivity is a poor predictor of task importance, suggesting not only that networks which generalize well minimize their dependence on individual units by reducing their selectivity, but also that individually selective units may not be necessary for strong network performance.
Recent work has demonstrated that deep neural networks (DNNs) are capable of memorizing extremely large datasets such as ImageNet BID39 .
Despite this capability, DNNs in practice achieve low generalization error on tasks ranging from image classification BID17 to language translation BID37 .
These observations raise a key question: why do some networks generalize while others do not?Answers
to these questions have taken a variety of forms. A variety
of studies have related generalization performance to the flatness of minima and PAC-Bayes bounds BID18 BID20 BID27 BID14 , though recent work has demonstrated that sharp minima can also generalize BID13 . Others have
focused on the information content stored in network weights BID0 , while still others have demonstrated that stochastic gradient descent itself encourages generalization BID8 BID34 BID36 .Here, we use
ablation analyses to measure the reliance of trained networks on single directions. We define a
single direction in activation space as the activation of a single unit or feature map or some linear combination of units in response to some input. We find that
networks which memorize the training set are substantially more dependent on single directions than those which do not, and that this difference is preserved even across sets of networks with identical topology trained on identical data, but with different generalization performance. Moreover, we
found that as networks begin to overfit, they become more reliant on single directions, suggesting that this metric could be used as a signal for early stopping.We also show that networks trained with batch normalization are more robust to cumulative ablations than networks trained without batch normalization and that batch normalization decreases the class selectivity of individual feature maps, suggesting an alternative mechanism by which batch normalization may encourage good generalization performance. Finally, we
show that, despite the focus on selective single units in the analysis of DNNs (and in neuroscience; BID21 BID40 BID28 BID9 , the class selectivity of single units is a poor predictor of their importance to the network's output.
In this work, we have taken an empirical approach to understand what differentiates neural networks which generalize from those which do not.
Our experiments demonstrate that generalization capability is related to a network's reliance on single directions, both in networks trained on corrupted and uncorrupted data, and over the course of training for a single network.
They also show that batch normalization, a highly successful regularizer, seems to implicitly discourage reliance on single directions.One clear extension of this work is to use these observations to construct a regularizer which more directly penalizes reliance on single directions.
As it happens, the most obvious candidate to regularize single direction reliance is dropout (or its variants), which, as we have shown, does not appear to regularize for single direction reliance past the dropout fraction used in training (Section 3.3).
Interestingly, these results suggest that one is able to predict a network's generalization performance without inspecting a held-out validation or test set.
This observation could be used in several interesting ways.
First, in situations where labeled training data is sparse, testing networks' reliance on single directions may provide a mechanism to assess generalization performance without sacrificing training data to be used as a validation set.
Second, by using computationally cheap empirical measures of single direction reliance, such as evaluating performance at a single ablation point or sparsely sampling the ablation curve, this metric could be used as a signal for early-stopping or hyperparameter selection.
We have shown that this metric is viable in simple datasets (Section 3.2), but further work will be necessary to evaluate viability in more complicated datasets.Another interesting direction for further research would be to evaluate the relationship between single direction reliance and generalization performance across different generalization regimes.
In this work, we evaluate generalization in which train and test data are drawn from the same distribution, but a more stringent form of generalization is one in which the test set is drawn from a unique, but overlapping distribution with the train set.
The extent to which single direction reliance depends on the overlap between the train and test distributions is also worth exploring in future research.This work makes a potentially surprising observation about the role of individually selective units in DNNs.
We found not only that the class selectivity of single directions is largely uncorrelated with their ultimate importance to the network's output, but also that batch normalization decreases the class selectivity of individual feature maps.
This result suggests that highly class selective units may actually be harmful to network performance.
In addition, it implies than methods for understanding neural networks based on analyzing highly selective single units, or finding optimal inputs for single units, such as activation maximization BID15 ) may be misleading.
Importantly, as we have not measured feature selectivity, it is unclear whether these results will generalize to featureselective directions.
Further work will be necessary to clarify all of these points.

assistant: text: We find that deep networks which generalize poorly are more reliant on single directions than those that generalize well, and evaluate the impact of dropout and batch normalization, as well as class selectivity on single direction reliance.