Evaluating State-of-the-Art Classification Models Against Bayes
  Optimality
  Evaluating the inherent difficulty of a given data-driven classification
problem is important for establishing absolute benchmarks and evaluating
progress in the field. To this end, a natural quantity to consider is the
\emph{Bayes error}, which measures the optimal classification error
theoretically achievable for a given data distribution. While generally an
intractable quantity, we show that we can compute the exact Bayes error of
generative models learned using normalizing flows. Our technique relies on a
fundamental result, which states that the Bayes error is invariant under
invertible transformation. Therefore, we can compute the exact Bayes error of
the learned flow models by computing it for Gaussian base distributions, which
can be done efficiently using Holmes-Diaconis-Ross integration. Moreover, we
show that by varying the temperature of the learned flow models, we can
generate synthetic datasets that closely resemble standard benchmark datasets,
but with almost any desired Bayes error. We use our approach to conduct a
thorough investigation of state-of-the-art classification models, and find that
in some -- but not all -- cases, these models are capable of obtaining accuracy
very near optimal. Finally, we use our method to evaluate the intrinsic
"hardness" of standard benchmark datasets, and classes within those datasets.
