Model-specific Data Subsampling with Influence Functions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.10218v1
• Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:10:28 GMT
• Title: Model-specific Data Subsampling with Influence Functions
• Authors: Anant Raj and Cameron Musco and Lester Mackey and Nicolo Fusi
• Abstract summary: We develop a model-specific data subsampling strategy that improves over random sampling whenever training points have varying influence. Specifically, we leverage influence functions to guide our selection strategy, proving theoretically, and demonstrating empirically that our approach quickly selects high-quality models.
• Score: 37.64859614131316
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Model selection requires repeatedly evaluating models on a given dataset and measuring their relative performances. In modern applications of machine learning, the models being considered are increasingly more expensive to evaluate and the datasets of interest are increasing in size. As a result, the process of model selection is time-consuming and computationally inefficient. In this work, we develop a model-specific data subsampling strategy that improves over random sampling whenever training points have varying influence. Specifically, we leverage influence functions to guide our selection strategy, proving theoretically, and demonstrating empirically that our approach quickly selects high-quality models.

Related papers

• A Two-Phase Recall-and-Select Framework for Fast Model Selection [13.385915962994806]
  We propose a two-phase (coarse-recall and fine-selection) model selection framework. It aims to enhance the efficiency of selecting a robust model by leveraging the models' training performances on benchmark datasets. It has been demonstrated that the proposed methodology facilitates the selection of a high-performing model at a rate about 3x times faster than conventional baseline methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T14:44:44Z)
• DsDm: Model-Aware Dataset Selection with Datamodels [81.01744199870043]
  Standard practice is to filter for examples that match human notions of data quality. We find that selecting according to similarity with "high quality" data sources may not increase (and can even hurt) performance compared to randomly selecting data. Our framework avoids handpicked notions of data quality, and instead models explicitly how the learning process uses train datapoints to predict on the target tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T17:22:00Z)
• Secrets of RLHF in Large Language Models Part II: Reward Modeling [134.97964938009588]
  We introduce a series of novel methods to mitigate the influence of incorrect and ambiguous preferences in the dataset. We also introduce contrastive learning to enhance the ability of reward models to distinguish between chosen and rejected responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-11T17:56:59Z)
• A prediction and behavioural analysis of machine learning methods for modelling travel mode choice [0.26249027950824505]
  We conduct a systematic comparison of different modelling approaches, across multiple modelling problems, in terms of the key factors likely to affect model choice. Results indicate that the models with the highest disaggregate predictive performance provide poorer estimates of behavioural indicators and aggregate mode shares. It is also observed that the MNL model performs robustly in a variety of situations, though ML techniques can improve the estimates of behavioural indices such as Willingness to Pay.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-11T11:10:32Z)
• Deep Learning for Choice Modeling [5.173001988341294]
  We develop deep learning-based choice models under two settings of choice modeling: feature-free and feature-based. Our model captures both the intrinsic utility for each candidate choice and the effect that the assortment has on the choice probability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-19T13:10:17Z)
• fETSmcs: Feature-based ETS model component selection [8.99236558175168]
  We propose an efficient approach for ETS model selection by training classifiers on simulated data to predict appropriate model component forms for a given time series. We evaluate our approach on the widely used forecasting competition data set M4 in terms of both point forecasts and prediction intervals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-26T13:52:43Z)
• Adaptive Sampling Strategies to Construct Equitable Training Datasets [0.7036032466145111]
  In domains ranging from computer vision to natural language processing, machine learning models have been shown to exhibit stark disparities. One factor contributing to these performance gaps is a lack of representation in the data the models are trained on. We formalize the problem of creating equitable training datasets, and propose a statistical framework for addressing this problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-31T19:19:30Z)
• Model-agnostic multi-objective approach for the evolutionary discovery of mathematical models [55.41644538483948]
  In modern data science, it is more interesting to understand the properties of the model, which parts could be replaced to obtain better results. We use multi-objective evolutionary optimization for composite data-driven model learning to obtain the algorithm's desired properties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-07T11:17:09Z)
• On the Efficacy of Adversarial Data Collection for Question Answering: Results from a Large-Scale Randomized Study [65.17429512679695]
  In adversarial data collection (ADC), a human workforce interacts with a model in real time, attempting to produce examples that elicit incorrect predictions. Despite ADC's intuitive appeal, it remains unclear when training on adversarial datasets produces more robust models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T00:48:33Z)
• 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)
• Models, Pixels, and Rewards: Evaluating Design Trade-offs in Visual Model-Based Reinforcement Learning [109.74041512359476]
  We study a number of design decisions for the predictive model in visual MBRL algorithms. We find that a range of design decisions that are often considered crucial, such as the use of latent spaces, have little effect on task performance. We show how this phenomenon is related to exploration and how some of the lower-scoring models on standard benchmarks will perform the same as the best-performing models when trained on the same training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-08T18:03:21Z)

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.