Papers › Bottlenecks CLUB: Unifying Information-Theoretic Trade-offs Among Complexity, Leakage,...
Bottlenecks CLUB: Unifying Information-Theoretic Trade-offs Among Complexity, Leakage, and Utility
Behrooz Razeghi, Flavio P. Calmon, Deniz Gunduz, Slava Voloshynovskiy
Bottleneck problems are an important class of optimization problems that have recently gained increasing attention in the domain of machine learning and information theory. They are widely used in generative models, fair machine learning algorithms, design of privacy-assuring mechanisms, and appear as information-theoretic performance bounds in various multi-user communication problems. In this work, we propose a general family of optimization problems, termed as complexity-leakage-utility bottleneck (CLUB) model, which (i) provides a unified theoretical framework that generalizes most of the state-of-the-art literature for the information-theoretic privacy models, (ii) establishes a new interpretation of the popular generative and discriminative models, (iii) constructs new insights to the generative compression models, and (iv) can be used in the fair generative models. We first formulate the CLUB model as a complexity-constrained privacy-utility optimization problem. We then connect it with the closely related bottleneck problems, namely information bottleneck (IB), privacy funnel (PF), deterministic IB (DIB), conditional entropy bottleneck (CEB), and conditional PF (CPF). We show that the CLUB model generalizes all these problems as well as most other information-theoretic privacy models. Then, we construct the deep variational CLUB (DVCLUB) models by employing neural networks to parameterize variational approximations of the associated information quantities. Building upon these information quantities, we present unified objectives of the supervised and unsupervised DVCLUB models. Leveraging the DVCLUB model in an unsupervised setup, we then connect it with state-of-the-art generative models, such as variational auto-encoders (VAEs), generative adversarial networks (GANs), as well as the Wasserstein GAN (WGAN), Wasserstein auto-encoder (WAE), and adversarial auto-encoder (AAE) models through the optimal transport (OT) problem. We then show that the DVCLUB model can also be used in fair representation learning problems, where the goal is to mitigate the undesired bias during the training phase of a machine learning model. We conduct extensive quantitative experiments on colored-MNIST and CelebA datasets, with a public implementation available, to evaluate and analyze the CLUB model.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2207.04895")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 7 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 7 have no recorded run.
By repository: official repository: 7 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
7 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 7 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 7 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from BehroozRazeghi/CLUB. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
13cd80dd60cc95dc · report
82e27d8af6263c97 · report
d04634cce70ef6e2 · report
02148b2138ec40d0 · report
da8ba3ba881fc543 · report
dcb7882ba2120be4 · report
09b4e557982cb315 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections