  The bias-variance trade-off is a central concept in supervised learning. In
classical statistics, increasing the complexity of a model (e.g., number of
parameters) reduces bias but also increases variance. Until recently, it was
commonly believed that optimal performance is achieved at intermediate model
complexities which strike a balance between bias and variance. Modern Deep
Learning methods flout this dogma, achieving state-of-the-art performance using
"over-parameterized models" where the number of fit parameters is large enough
to perfectly fit the training data. As a result, understanding bias and
variance in over-parameterized models has emerged as a fundamental problem in
machine learning. Here, we use methods from statistical physics to derive
analytic expressions for bias and variance in two minimal models of
over-parameterization (linear regression and two-layer neural networks with
nonlinear data distributions), allowing us to disentangle properties stemming
from the model architecture and random sampling of data. In both models,
increasing the number of fit parameters leads to a phase transition where the
training error goes to zero and the test error diverges as a result of the
variance (while the bias remains finite). Beyond this threshold, the test error
of the two-layer neural network decreases due to a monotonic decrease in
\emph{both} the bias and variance in contrast with the classical bias-variance
trade-off. We also show that in contrast with classical intuition,
over-parameterized models can overfit even in the absence of noise and exhibit
bias even if the student and teacher models match. We synthesize these results
to construct a holistic understanding of generalization error and the
bias-variance trade-off in over-parameterized models and relate our results to
random matrix theory.
