Collaborative Filtering under Model Uncertainty

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2008.10117v2
• Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 02:10:59 GMT
• Title: Collaborative Filtering under Model Uncertainty
• Abstract summary: We use the definition of predictive multiplicity by Marx, Pin Calmon, and Ustun to examine different variations of this model. Most of these models produce very similar results in terms of discrepancy and ambiguity for the availability and only in some cases the availability sets differ significantly.
• Score: 2.538209532048867
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In their work, Dean, Rich, and Recht create a model to research recourse and availability of items in a recommender system. We used the definition of predictive multiplicity by Marx, Pin Calmon, and Ustun to examine different variations of this model, using different values for two model parameters. Pairwise comparison of their models show, that most of these models produce very similar results in terms of discrepancy and ambiguity for the availability and only in some cases the availability sets differ significantly.

Related papers

• Effect of Model Merging in Domain-Specific Ad-hoc Retrieval [1.1164586555084026]
  Model merging is a technique that combines the diverse characteristics of multiple models.<n>We merged the weights of a source retrieval model and a domain-specific (non-retrieval) model using a linear approach.<n>The experimental results indicate that model merging has the potential to produce more effective domain-specific retrieval models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T06:54:23Z)
• On Arbitrary Predictions from Equally Valid Models [49.56463611078044]
  Model multiplicity refers to multiple machine learning models that admit conflicting predictions for the same patient.<n>We show that even small ensembles can mitigate/eliminate predictive multiplicity in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T16:15:59Z)
• Multi-Level Collaboration in Model Merging [56.31088116526825]
  This paper explores the intrinsic connections between model merging and model ensembling. We find that even when previous restrictions are not met, there is still a way for model merging to attain a near-identical and superior performance similar to that of ensembling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-03T07:45:04Z)
• Ranked from Within: Ranking Large Multimodal Models Without Labels [73.96543593298426]
  We show that uncertainty scores derived from softmax distributions provide a robust basis for ranking models across various tasks.<n>This facilitates the ranking of LMMs on unlabeled data, providing a practical approach for selecting models for diverse target domains without requiring manual annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T13:05:43Z)
• You Only Merge Once: Learning the Pareto Set of Preference-Aware Model Merging [11.186194228460273]
  We propose preference-aware model merging in which the performance of the merged model on each base model's task is treated as an objective. In only one merging process, the proposed parameter-efficient structure can generate the whole set of merged models. We show that the proposed preference-aware model merging can obtain a diverse set of trade-off models and outperforms state-of-the-art model merging baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T03:41:14Z)
• EMR-Merging: Tuning-Free High-Performance Model Merging [55.03509900949149]
  We show that Elect, Mask & Rescale-Merging (EMR-Merging) shows outstanding performance compared to existing merging methods. EMR-Merging is tuning-free, thus requiring no data availability or any additional training while showing impressive performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T05:25:45Z)
• Dataless Knowledge Fusion by Merging Weights of Language Models [51.8162883997512]
  Fine-tuning pre-trained language models has become the prevalent paradigm for building downstream NLP models. This creates a barrier to fusing knowledge across individual models to yield a better single model. We propose a dataless knowledge fusion method that merges models in their parameter space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T20:46:43Z)
• Investigating Ensemble Methods for Model Robustness Improvement of Text Classifiers [66.36045164286854]
  We analyze a set of existing bias features and demonstrate there is no single model that works best for all the cases. By choosing an appropriate bias model, we can obtain a better robustness result than baselines with a more sophisticated model design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-28T17:52:10Z)
• An Empirical Study of Accuracy, Fairness, Explainability, Distributional Robustness, and Adversarial Robustness [16.677541058361218]
  We describe an empirical study to evaluate multiple model types on various metrics along these dimensions on several datasets. Our results show that no particular model type performs well on all dimensions, and demonstrate the kinds of trade-offs involved in selecting models evaluated along multiple dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-29T18:21:19Z)
• Comparing hundreds of machine learning classifiers and discrete choice models in predicting travel behavior: an empirical benchmark [6.815730801645785]
  Many studies have compared machine learning (ML) and discrete choice models (DCMs) in predicting travel demand. These studies often lack generalizability as they compare models deterministically without considering contextual variations. This benchmark study compares two large-scale data sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-01T19:45:47Z)
• Characterizing Fairness Over the Set of Good Models Under Selective Labels [69.64662540443162]
  We develop a framework for characterizing predictive fairness properties over the set of models that deliver similar overall performance. We provide tractable algorithms to compute the range of attainable group-level predictive disparities. We extend our framework to address the empirically relevant challenge of selectively labelled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-02T02:11:37Z)
• Improving the Reconstruction of Disentangled Representation Learners via Multi-Stage Modeling [54.94763543386523]
  Current autoencoder-based disentangled representation learning methods achieve disentanglement by penalizing the ( aggregate) posterior to encourage statistical independence of the latent factors. We present a novel multi-stage modeling approach where the disentangled factors are first learned using a penalty-based disentangled representation learning method. Then, the low-quality reconstruction is improved with another deep generative model that is trained to model the missing correlated latent variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-25T18:51:15Z)
• Selecting Diverse Models for Scientific Insight [0.12891210250935145]
  We show how different penalty settings can promote either shrinkage or sparsity of coefficients in separate models. A choice of penalty form that enforces variable selection is applied to predict stacking fault energy from steel alloy composition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-16T14:06:55Z)
• Decision-Making with Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes [71.44735417472043]
  We show that a posterior approximation distinct from the variational distribution should be used for making decisions. Motivated by these theoretical results, we propose learning several approximate proposals for the best model. In addition to toy examples, we present a full-fledged case study of single-cell RNA sequencing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-17T19:23:36Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.