Accountable Error Characterization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2105.04707v1
• Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 23:40:01 GMT
• Title: Accountable Error Characterization
• Authors: Amita Misra, Zhe Liu and Jalal Mahmud
• Abstract summary: We propose an accountable error characterization method, AEC, to understand when and where errors occur. We perform error detection for a sentiment analysis task using AEC as a case study.
• Score: 7.830479195591646
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Customers of machine learning systems demand accountability from the companies employing these algorithms for various prediction tasks. Accountability requires understanding of system limit and condition of erroneous predictions, as customers are often interested in understanding the incorrect predictions, and model developers are absorbed in finding methods that can be used to get incremental improvements to an existing system. Therefore, we propose an accountable error characterization method, AEC, to understand when and where errors occur within the existing black-box models. AEC, as constructed with human-understandable linguistic features, allows the model developers to automatically identify the main sources of errors for a given classification system. It can also be used to sample for the set of most informative input points for a next round of training. We perform error detection for a sentiment analysis task using AEC as a case study. Our results on the sample sentiment task show that AEC is able to characterize erroneous predictions into human understandable categories and also achieves promising results on selecting erroneous samples when compared with the uncertainty-based sampling.

Related papers

• Subtle Errors Matter: Preference Learning via Error-injected Self-editing [59.405145971637204]
  We propose a novel preference learning framework called eRror-Injected Self-Editing (RISE) RISE injects predefined subtle errors into partial tokens of correct solutions to construct hard pairs for error mitigation. Experiments validate the effectiveness of RISE, with preference learning on Qwen2-7B-Instruct yielding notable improvements of 3.0% on GSM8K and 7.9% on MATH.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T07:43:38Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Classification Errors Through Interpretable Token Patterns [58.91023283103762]
  Characterizing errors in easily interpretable terms gives insight into whether a classifier is prone to making systematic errors. We propose to discover those patterns of tokens that distinguish correct and erroneous predictions. We show that our method, Premise, performs well in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T00:24:26Z)
• Generalizable Error Modeling for Human Data Annotation: Evidence From an Industry-Scale Search Data Annotation Program [0.0]
  This paper presents a predictive error model trained to detect potential errors in search relevance annotation tasks. We show that errors can be predicted with moderate model performance (AUC=0.65-0.75) and that model performance generalizes well across applications. We demonstrate the usefulness of the model in the context of auditing, where prioritizing tasks with high predicted error probabilities considerably increases the amount of corrected annotation errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T21:21:19Z)
• Representing Timed Automata and Timing Anomalies of Cyber-Physical Production Systems in Knowledge Graphs [51.98400002538092]
  This paper aims to improve model-based anomaly detection in CPPS by combining the learned timed automaton with a formal knowledge graph about the system. Both the model and the detected anomalies are described in the knowledge graph in order to allow operators an easier interpretation of the model and the detected anomalies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-25T15:25:57Z)
• Pushing the Right Buttons: Adversarial Evaluation of Quality Estimation [25.325624543852086]
  We propose a general methodology for adversarial testing of Quality Estimation for Machine Translation (MT) systems. We show that despite a high correlation with human judgements achieved by the recent SOTA, certain types of meaning errors are still problematic for QE to detect. Second, we show that on average, the ability of a given model to discriminate between meaning-preserving and meaning-altering perturbations is predictive of its overall performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-22T17:32:18Z)
• Translation Error Detection as Rationale Extraction [36.616561917049076]
  We study the behaviour of state-of-the-art sentence-level QE models and show that explanations can indeed be used to detect translation errors. We introduce a novel semi-supervised method for word-level QE and (ii) propose to use the QE task as a new benchmark for evaluating the plausibility of feature attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-27T09:35:14Z)
• When and Why does a Model Fail? A Human-in-the-loop Error Detection Framework for Sentiment Analysis [12.23497603132782]
  We propose an error detection framework for sentiment analysis based on explainable features. Experimental results show that, given limited human-in-the-loop intervention, our method is able to identify erroneous model predictions on unseen data with high precision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T05:45:42Z)
• A Bayesian Approach to Identifying Representational Errors [19.539720986687524]
  We present a generative model for inferring representational errors based on observations of an actor's behavior. We show that our approach can recover blind spots of both reinforcement learning agents as well as human users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-28T16:43:01Z)
• Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Sets [112.9186453405701]
  We show how to generate set-valued predictions from a black-box predictor that control the expected loss on future test points at a user-specified level. Our approach provides explicit finite-sample guarantees for any dataset by using a holdout set to calibrate the size of the prediction sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-07T18:59:33Z)
• Understanding Classifier Mistakes with Generative Models [88.20470690631372]
  Deep neural networks are effective on supervised learning tasks, but have been shown to be brittle. In this paper, we leverage generative models to identify and characterize instances where classifiers fail to generalize. Our approach is agnostic to class labels from the training set which makes it applicable to models trained in a semi-supervised way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-05T22:13:21Z)
• On the Robustness of Language Encoders against Grammatical Errors [66.05648604987479]
  We collect real grammatical errors from non-native speakers and conduct adversarial attacks to simulate these errors on clean text data. Results confirm that the performance of all tested models is affected but the degree of impact varies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-12T11:01:44Z)

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.