TL;DR
This paper addresses regression problems with interval targets, proposing new loss functions and a min-max formulation to handle uncertainty, backed by theoretical bounds and extensive experiments demonstrating state-of-the-art results.
Contribution
It introduces a novel min-max learning approach for interval targets and establishes non-asymptotic generalization bounds under relaxed assumptions.
Findings
Proposed loss functions are compatible with interval targets.
The min-max formulation achieves competitive performance.
Experimental results outperform existing methods on real datasets.
Abstract
We study the problem of regression with interval targets, where only upper and lower bounds on target values are available in the form of intervals. This problem arises when the exact target label is expensive or impossible to obtain, due to inherent uncertainties. In the absence of exact targets, traditional regression loss functions cannot be used. First, we study the methodology of using a loss functions compatible with interval targets, for which we establish non-asymptotic generalization bounds based on smoothness of the hypothesis class that significantly relaxing prior assumptions of realizability and small ambiguity degree. Second, we propose a novel min-max learning formulation: minimize against the worst-case (maximized) target labels within the provided intervals. The maximization problem in the latter is non-convex, but we show that good performance can be achieved with the…
Peer Reviews
Decision·NeurIPS 2025 poster
Strength 1. The paper is clearly written, and the theoretical results appear to be rigorous and well-justified. 2. The work significantly improves upon prior results by removing the restrictive realizability and small ambiguity degree assumptions, instead establishing generalization guarantees under a smoothness condition on the hypothesis class. The empirical results are comprehensive and demonstrate that the proposed methods achieve strong performance across multiple real-world datasets. 3. T
**Strengths** 1. In general, the ideas are clearly conveyed. 2. The generalization bound decomposition indicates the usefulness of the proposed method. 3. The setting is interesting and practical in real-world data collection, where the labels are often noisy. **Weaknesses** 1. While I appreciate the theoretical results, the technical contribution is unclear to me. The projection loss is very similar to prior works (such as [1]), while the minmax formulation seems to be a special or simplif
## Strengths. - Theoretical advance over prior work. Extends the analysis to agnostic settings and relaxed ambiguity assumptions of Cheng et al. (2023) while still proving $O(n^{-1/2})$ convergence rates. - Clear link between smoothness and effective interval width. The “reduced-interval lemma” (Thm 3.6) formalizes how a global Lipschitz constant $m$ shrinks the set of plausible labels, providing an intuitive knob for bias–variance trade-off. - Two complementary risk surrogates. By analyzing bo
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
