The DOI matches its DataCite record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enforcing Predictive Invariance across Structured Biomedical Domains
Open accessAbstract
Many biochemical applications such as molecular property prediction require models to generalize beyond their training domains (environments). Moreover, natural environments in these tasks are structured, defined by complex descriptors such as molecular scaffolds or protein families. Therefore, most environments are either never seen during training, or contain only a single training example. To address these challenges, we propose a new regret minimization (RGM) algorithm and its extension for structured environments. RGM builds from invariant risk minimization (IRM) by recasting simultaneous optimality condition in terms of predictive regret, finding a representation that enables the predictor to compete against an oracle with hindsight access to held-out environments. The structured extension adaptively highlights variation due to complex environments via specialized domain perturbations. We evaluate our method on multiple applications: molecular property prediction, protein homology and stability prediction and show that RGM significantly outperforms previous state-of-the-art baselines.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Very recent work (Jin et al., 2020) has leveraged scaffold information of molecules to improve the extrapolation performance of molecular property predictors.
“In fact, very recent work (Jin et al., 2020) has leveraged scaffold information of molecules to improve the extrapolation performance of molecular property predictors.”
From WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts (2020) · cites this paper as Jin et al., 2020
Citations
Cites
Analyzing Learned Molecular Representations for Property Prediction
Yang, K., Swanson, K., Jin, W., Coley, C., Eiden, P., Gao, H., Guzman-Perez, A., Hopper, T., Kelley, B., Mathea, M., et al. (2019) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00237 · Cited by 1,923
Self-citationDomain Generalization via Invariant Feature Representation
Muandet, K., Balduzzi, D., & Schölkopf, B. (2013) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1301.2115 · Cited by 771
On Learning Invariant Representation for Domain Adaptation
Zhao, H., Combes, R. T. D., Zhang, K., & Gordon, G. J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.09453 · Cited by 134
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts
Koh, P. W., Sagawa, S., Marklund, H., Xie, S. M., Zhang, M., Balsubramani, A., Hu, W., Yasunaga, M., Phillips, R. L., Gao, I., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.07421 · Cited by 518
Metadata
- Authors
- Jin, W., Barzilay, R., & Jaakkola, T.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2006.03908
- OpenAlex
- W3092025760
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- regret minimization, invariant risk minimization, domain generalization, structured environments, molecular property prediction, protein stability prediction, domain perturbation, molecular scaffolds, protein families
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review